Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 307/2016 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2016:II.DOR.307.2016 AI generated

Supreme Court allows appeal regarding tort liability prerequisites and damages calculation correctness.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 307/2016
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 permitted the appeal limited to specific questions concerning the prerequisites for the first defendant's tort liability and the correct application of substantive law regarding damages. The first defendant argued that the article's publication in a school textbook did not constitute a legal violation and that causation was unproven, while the second defendant sought to uphold the lower court's judgment. The court granted the appeal only within the scope defined by the applicant's request, confirming that the statutory conditions for review were met.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

367.1 odst. 1 ZPP; 367.c odst. 3 ZPP: An appeal is admissible only regarding specific questions of tort liability prerequisites and the correct application of substantive law when the lower court's decision is contested on these grounds.

Keywords

AI generated
tort liability prerequisites damages calculation appeal admissibility substantive law application ZPP review scope

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.1 odst. 1 ZPP
367.c odst. 3 ZPP

Cited Case Law

AI generated
VSRS II Ips 453/2007
Zatrjuje tudi kršitev razpravnega načela in se ob tem sklicuje na zadevi VSRS II Ips 453/2007 in VIII Ips 125/2013.
VSRS VIII Ips 125/2013
AI generated
VSL sodba I Cp 1956/2010
Court partially allows appeal on co-ownership damages, adjusting award to 2,614 EUR and interest start date.
VSRS sodba II Ips 228/2014
Supreme Court rejects appeal, ruling that prior knowledge of ownership disputes negates good faith possession claims. Good faith is determined by conduct regarding ownership disputes, not internal belief. The court upheld the lower court's finding of bad faith possession. The court rejected the appeal, ruling that the defendants' prior knowledge of ownership disputes negated their claim of good faith possession. The court held that good faith is determined by conduct regarding ownership disputes, not internal belief. The lower court's finding of bad faith possession was upheld. The court rejected the appeal, ruling that the defendants' prior knowledge of ownership disputes negated their claim of good faith possession. The court held that good faith is determined by conduct regarding ownership disputes, not internal belief. The lower court's finding of bad faith possession was upheld.
VSL sklep I Cp 429/2000
Appeal granted; civil court quashed due to failure to ascertain facts on defamation liability and damages causation.
VSRS sklep II DoR 217/2014
Supreme Court allows review of employer liability under Obligations Act for sexual abuse by volunteer.
VSRS Sodba VIII Ips 198/2016
Supreme Court dismisses appeal against work injury compensation, citing established precedent and procedural timeliness. The court rejected the claim for excessive damages and late statute of limitations arguments.

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 vprašanj, ali so izpolnjene vse predpostavke odškodninske odgovornosti prve toženke; in ali je sodišče pravilno uporabilo materialno pravo pri odločanju o višini odškodnine.

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanj, ali so izpolnjene vse predpostavke odškodninske odgovornosti prve toženke; in ali je sodišče pravilno uporabilo materialno pravo pri odločanju o višini odškodnine.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je toženkama naložilo, da morata nerazdelno tožnici plačati znesek 30.000,00 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi.

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbi toženk zavrnilo in potrdilo prvostopenjsko sodbo.

3. Prva toženka v predlogu za dopustitev revizije navaja, da objava dela spornega članka v šolskem učbeniku, ker je le-ta še vedno dostopen na spletu, ne more pomeniti protipravnosti. Poleg tega identiteta tožnice samo na podlagi navedenega članka ni ugotovljiva. Trdi, da tudi vzročna zveza ni izkazana, prisojena odškodnina pa se ji zdi pretirana. Predlaga dopustitev revizije glede devetih vprašanj, ki jih je mogoče strniti v vprašanja, ali (konkretna) objava dela članka v šolskem učbeniku pomeni poseg v tožničine pravice iz 35. in 38. člena Ustave, upoštevajoč tudi 39. člen Ustave; ali objava članka, ki je prosto dostopen na spletu, tudi v šolskem učbeniku pomeni protipravno ravnanje; in ali je v obravnavanem primeru, upoštevajoč okoliščine konkretnega primera, podana vzročna zveza in pravno priznana škoda. Zatrjuje tudi kršitev razpravnega načela in se ob tem sklicuje na zadevi VSRS II Ips 453/2007 in VIII Ips 125/2013.

4. Predlog je utemeljen v obsegu, opredeljenem v izreku tega sklepa.

5. Vrhovno sodišče je ugotovilo, da so glede vprašanj, opredeljenih v izreku tega sklepa, podani pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku in je zato v tako začrtanem obsegu revizijo dopustilo (tretji odstavek 367.c člena istega zakona).