Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 124/2019 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2019:II.DOR.124.2019 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses review application as statutory review conditions under ZPP Art. 367a are not met.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 124/2019
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia rejected the applicant's request for permission to file a review against the Second Instance Court's decision. The applicant argued that the First Instance Court incorrectly ruled on liability and the nature of non-pecuniary damage, while also claiming judicial misconduct. The court determined that the applicant failed to demonstrate a violation of law or a significant error in fact-finding, thereby failing to satisfy the strict statutory requirements for a review under Article 367a of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a of the Code of Civil Procedure; A review application is inadmissible if the applicant fails to prove that the lower court's decision violates the law or contains a significant error in fact-finding, as the statutory conditions for granting a review were not met in this instance.

Keywords

AI generated
Code of Civil Procedure review application permission to review non-pecuniary damage judicial misconduct claim

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a of the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 367c of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
Sodba II Ips 332/2010
Supreme Court dismisses appeal in noise nuisance case, upholding 4,000 EUR damages for a house 5 meters from the road.
VSL Sodba II Cp 564/2021
Appeal court partially allows claim for pain and suffering damages based on objective comparison with similar cases.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 188/2025
Appeal dismissed; claim for harassment damages barred by statute of limitations and procedural defects.
VSL sodba II Cp 3323/2006
Pet owner's claim dismissed; employee not liable for dog death without intent to cause harm.
VSL Sodba II Cp 1529/2024
Civil court dismissed tort claim for car injury where plaintiff failed to prove accident causation.

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

Predlog se zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Pogoji iz 367.a člena ZPP za dopustitev revizije niso izpolnjeni.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek za plačilo 4.000,00 EUR odškodnine z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi. Odločilo je, da mora tožnica toženki povrne njene pravdne stroške.

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je tožničino pritožbo z dne 29. 8. 2018 zavrglo. Tožničino pritožbo z dne 28. 6. 2018 je zavrnilo.

3. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje je tožnica vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije in predlagal dopustitev revizije glede naslednjih pravnih vprašanj:

− Ali je odločitev sodišča, da ne obstoja odškodninska odgovornost tožene stranke za škodo, ki je nastala tožnici zaradi ravnanja tožene stranke, materialnopravno pravilna?

− Ali je sodišče materialno pravno pravilno odločilo, da zatrjevana škoda ne predstavlja pravno priznane oblike nepremoženjske škode?

− Ali je pravilna odločitev sodišča, da se sodnik v dani situaciji, ni pregrešil zoper profesionalne standarde sodniške službe, na kar je tožnica ves čas postopkov opozarjala?

4. Predlog ni utemeljen.

5. Predpostavke za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku niso izpolnjene. Skladno z določbo drugega odstavka 367.c člena istega zakona je zato Vrhovno sodišče predlog zavrnilo.