Legislator Case Law & Legislation
VSL Sklep II Cp 1019/2019 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2019:II.CP.1019.2019 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because late payment of appeal fee resulted in withdrawal of the appeal under ZPP rules.

Case Number VSL Sklep II Cp 1019/2019
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Higher Court in Ljubljana dismissed the appeal, confirming the first-instance court's decision that the appeal was withdrawn due to late fee payment. The appellant argued they paid the fee on April 4, 2019, after receiving the payment order on March 18, 2019, which created a 15-day deadline expiring on April 3. The court ruled that since the fee was not paid within the statutory period, the appeal was legally withdrawn under Article 105.a of the Code of Civil Procedure, necessitating the rejection of the appeal and the appellant's cost claim.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 105.a of the Code of Civil Procedure; Article 365 of the Code of Civil Procedure: An appeal is deemed withdrawn if the required appeal fee is not paid within the prescribed time limit, resulting in the automatic dismissal of the appeal.

Keywords

AI generated
appeal fee payment statutory time limit deemed withdrawal Code of Civil Procedure procedural default costs allocation appeal dismissal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
AI generated

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]

Ker taksa za pritožbo ni bila plačana v določenem roku, se je ta pravilno in v skladu z zakonom štela za umaknjeno.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Z izpodbijanim sklepom sodišča prve stopnje je odločeno, da se zaradi nepravočasnega plačila takse pritožba toženca z dne 5. 3. 2019 zoper sodbo v tej zadevi z dne 31. 1. 2019 šteje za umaknjeno.

2. Zoper ta sklep se toženec pritožuje. Navaja, da je sodno takso v postavljenem roku 4. 4. 2019 plačal in prilaga dokazilo. Predlaga, da pritožbeno sodišče sklep razveljavi in tožniku naloži, da mu povrne pritožbene stroške, ki jih opredeljuje.

3. Pritožba ni utemeljena.

4. Toženec je bil s plačilnim nalogom pozvan, da sodno takso za pritožbo plača v roku 15 dni in hkrati opozorjen na posledice, če v določenem roku ne bo tako ravnal. Poziv je toženec prejel 18. 3. 2019, kar pomeni, da se je rok za plačilo takse iztekel 3. 4. 2019, takso pa je plačal 4. 4. 2019. Ker torej taksa za pritožbo ni bila plačana v določenem roku, se je ta pravilno in v skladu z zakonom štela za umaknjeno (3. odst. 105.a čl. Zakona o pravdnem postopku; ZPP).

5. Pritožbo je bilo zato treba zavrniti, s stroškovno zahtevo vred in izpodbijani sklep potrditi (2. tč. 365. čl. ZPP).