Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSM sklep Cpg 489/95 ECLI:SI:VSMB:1997:CPG.489.95 AI generated

Appeal dismissed; court awards costs only for clearly defined and specific claims.

Case Number VSM sklep Cpg 489/95
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appeal was rejected as unfounded, confirming the first-instance court's decision to award legal costs. The defendant withdrew objections regarding specific claims, leading the court to impose costs of 5,250 SIT, while the first instance subsequently awarded an additional 12,670 SIT in favor of the plaintiff. The appellate court dismissed the appeal because the plaintiff failed to declare attendance at three hearings in her cost application, and the court ruled that costs are awarded only for clearly defined and specific claims.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku (ZPP); Sodišče odmeri stroške le na določno in opredeljeno zahtevo stranke.

Keywords

AI generated
legal costs assessment specific claim requirement appeal dismissal costs application procedural defect

Cited Legislation

AI generated
7. odst. 164. člena ZPP
AI generated
VSL Sodba I Cpg 665/2018
Contractor's appeal dismissed; court confirms subcontractor's claim against client for work performed.
VSL sodba I Cpg 1320/2003
Court dismisses appeal against mandatory chamber fee, ruling it is a public levy under constitution.
VSL Sklep II Ip 2013/2017
Appeal dismissed; enforcement of paulian judgment requires prior debt satisfaction per Civil Code Art. 255.
VSL Sklep I Cp 252/2019
Appeal allowed; court fees capped at 50% for free legal aid recipients unless full payment was declared. Free legal aid recipients are entitled to only half of court fees unless they declared full payment. Agreements between clients and lawyers to pay full fees are invalid under the Legal Aid Act.
VSL sodba II Cpg 86/2015
Appeal dismissed; manager lacks standing to claim tenant costs absent statutory obligation under Property Law.

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

Pritožba se zavrne kot neutemeljena in se potrdi sklep sodišča prve stopnje.

[JEDRO]

Sodišče odmeri pravdne stroške le na določno in opredeljeno zahtevo stranke.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Po ugovoru zoper sklep o izvršbi na podlagi verodostojne listine je tekel pravdni postopek glede obračunanih zamudnih obrestih in izvršilnih stroškov. Med pripravami za glavno obravnavo je toženka umaknila ugovor za sporne pripadke, kar je sodišče vzelo na znanje in toženki naložilo še pravdne stroške v znesku 5.250,00 sit z obrestmi od dneva izdaje sklepa do plačila. Prvostopno sodišče je nato ugodilo predlogu tožeče stranke in naknadno odmerilo v korist tožeče stranke še nadaljnje pravdne stroške v znesku 12.670,00 sit. Zoper ta sklep se je tožnica pritožila, češ da se je sodišče ponovno zmotilo, ker ji ni priznalo tudi udeležbe na treh narokih.

Pritožba ni utemeljena.

Sodišče odmeri stroške le na določno in opredeljeno zahtevo stranke.

Zato je najprej ugotoviti, da v stroškovniku v njeni vlogi z dne 26.9.1994, niti v vlogi z dne 26.9.1994, ki jo je sodišče prve stopnje štelo za naknadno prijavo stroškov po 7.odst.164. člena ZPP - tožnica ni priglasila stroškov pristopa na tri naroke. Pri tem pa je tudi prezrla, da na narok dne 29.8.1994 (v sporu majhne vrednosti) ni pristopila, na naroku dne 19.9.1994 odvetniški kandidat ni razpolagal z dokazili in podatki ter je zato obljubil vložiti pripravljalni spis, tretji narok pa ni bil opravljen, ker ga je sodišče preklicalo.

Izrek o stroških pritožbenega postopka je odpadel, ker niso bili priglašeni.