Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSL sklep II Cp 2055/2016 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2016:II.CP.2055.2016 AI generated

Appeal dismissed; lower court correctly declared jurisdictional dispute over economic matter between entity and sole proprietorship.

Case Number VSL sklep II Cp 2055/2016
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appeal was rejected, and the first-instance court's decision to declare itself incompetent was upheld. The lower court determined the dispute was economic in nature, involving a legal entity and a sole proprietorship regarding their business activities. Consequently, the High Court confirmed that the district court, not the regional court, was the proper forum for such economic disputes under the Civil Procedure Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

481. člen ZPP; 30. člen ZPP: When a dispute involves a legal entity and a sole proprietorship concerning their business activities, it constitutes an economic matter, making the district court the competent court, and the regional court's jurisdiction is excluded.

Keywords

AI generated
economic dispute classification jurisdictional competence sole proprietorship legal entity Civil Procedure Act

Cited Legislation

AI generated
481. člen ZPP
30. člen ZPP
2. tč. 365. člen ZPP
366.a člen ZPP
AI generated
VDSS sklep Pdp 137/2013
Appeal allowed; labor court lacks jurisdiction over insurance company liability not arising from employment relationship.
VSL sklep II Cp 2286/2011
Appeal dismissed; court upheld jurisdiction of district court for business disputes involving sole proprietorships.
VSL sklep I Cp 2527/2015
Appeal granted; Supreme Court rules jurisdiction lies with district court for property registration disputes under ZIZ s. 168(5).
VSL Sklep II Cp 634/2019
Appeal dismissed; appeal against non-competence ruling upheld as claim exceeds 20k EUR jurisdictional threshold.
VSRS sklep VIII DoR 3/2015
Supreme Court rejects review application against appellate court's ruling on subject-matter jurisdiction. Review requires finality of proceedings which this ruling lacks.

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 in se potrdi sklep sodišča prve stopnje.

[JEDRO]

Prvostopenjsko sodišče je pravilno odločilo in obrazložilo, da gre za gospodarski spor, ker je tožeča stranka zavod, tožena pa samostojna podjetnica in gre za spor v zvezi z njeno dejavnostjo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Z izpodbijanim sklepom se je okrajno sodišče izreklo za stvarno nepristojno za odločanje v tej zadevi in sklenilo, da bo po pravnomočnosti sklepa zadevo odstopilo Okrožnemu sodišču v Ljubljani.

2. Zoper sklep se pritožuje toženka in navaja dejstva glede sporne terjatve, odločitvi o pristojnosti pa vsebinsko ne nasprotuje in v zvezi z izpodbijano odločitvijo tudi ne podaja nobenega predloga.

3. Pritožba ni utemeljena.

4. Izpodbijani sklep je pravilen in zakonit. Prvostopenjsko sodišče je pravilno odločilo in obrazložilo, da gre za gospodarski spor, ker je tožeča stranka zavod, tožena pa samostojna podjetnica in gre za spor v zvezi z njeno dejavnostjo (481. čl. ZPP). Ker so za gospodarske spore pristopna okrožna sodišča (30. čl. ZPP), se je okrajno sodišče pravilno izreklo za nepristojno.

5. Glede na navedeno je bilo treba pritožbo zavrniti in izpodbijani sklep v skladu z 2. tč. 365. čl. ZPP potrditi. Na podlagi 366.a čl. ZPP sem o tem odločila višja sodnica posameznica.