Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS sklep III DoR 74/2014 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2014:III.DOR.74.2014 AI generated

Supreme Court allows review regarding whether a contractually faithful creditor can claim damages for breach of contract upon contract termination due to debtor's delay.

Case Number VSRS sklep III DoR 74/2014
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia granted the review request concerning a specific legal question regarding contract termination and damages. The first-instance court dismissed the claim for contractual damages, and the appellate court upheld this decision while awarding no costs. The court determined that the review is admissible because the legal issue raised meets the statutory requirements for Supreme Court intervention under the relevant procedural law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure; A review is admissible when a question arises regarding whether a creditor who has terminated a contract due to the debtor's delay in monetary performance can claim contractual damages for the resulting breach of contract.

Keywords

AI generated
contractual damages termination of contract debtor delay breach of contract review admissibility civil procedure law creditor rights

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated
VDSS sodba Pdp 1509/2014
Appeal dismissed; employer failed to prove employee used business connections violating non-compete clause.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 501/2022
Contractual penalty restricting employee resignation before start is void as it violates constitutional freedom from forced labor.
VDSS sklep Pdp 1074/2015
Appeal allowed: Court of Appeal reversed first instance judgment on contractual penalty for breach of non-compete clause.
VDSS sodba Pdp 158/2016
Appeal dismissed; non-compete clause upheld as protecting essential client relationships in insurance brokerage.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 461/2017
Court allows penalty for breach of non-compete clause without proving actual loss to employer.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja:

- ali lahko pogodbi zvesti upnik v primeru odstopa od pogodbe zaradi zamude z izpolnitvijo denarne obveznosti, zaradi katerega nastane položaj neizpolnitve pogodbe v ožjem smislu, od dolžnika zahteva plačilo pogodbene kazni.

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja ali lahko pogodbi zvesti upnik v primeru odstopa od pogodbe zaradi zamude z izpolnitvijo denarne obveznosti, zaradi katerega nastane položaj neizpolnitve pogodbe v ožjem smislu, od dolžnika zahteva plačilo pogodbene kazni.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek tožeče stranke za plačilo pogodbene kazni (I. točka izreka sodbe) ter ji posledično naložilo, da povrne toženi stranki stroške pravdnega postopka (II. točka izreka sodbe).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožeče stranke zavrnilo in izpodbijano sodbo potrdilo (I. točka izreka sodbe), pri čemer je sklenilo, da stranki sami nosita svoje pritožbene stroške (II. točka izreka sodbe).

3. Zoper sklep sodišča druge stopnje tožeča stranka vlaga predlog za dopustitev revizije.

4. Predlog je delno utemeljen.

5. Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku so izpolnjeni glede pravnega vprašanja, navedenega v izreku tega sklepa. Vrhovno sodišče je zato revizijo (v obsegu, začrtanem z navedenim vprašanjem) dopustilo.