Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSL Dopolnilni sklep II Cp 1406/2020 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2020:II.CP.1406.2020.1.COR AI generated

Court dismisses appeal and awards costs to appellant due to lack of necessity under ZPP Art. 155.1.

Case Number VSL Dopolnilni sklep II Cp 1406/2020
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Higher Court in Ljubljana issued a supplementary decision to dismiss the appellant's appeal and order them to bear the respondent's costs. The court found that the appellant's claimed costs did not meet the necessity criterion of Article 155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act. Consequently, the court ruled that the appellant must cover the expenses for both the appeal response and the supplementary decision itself.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act: Costs awarded to the appellant are limited to the minimum necessary to protect their interests, and excessive claims must be reduced in accordance with the principle of good faith.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act costs of appeal necessity criterion supplementary decision good faith principle small value dispute costs allocation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
155.1 of the Civil Procedure Act (ZPP)
AI generated
VSK Sodba I Cp 573/2015
Appeal dismissed; liability excluded under insurance terms as injury resulted from excavator operation, not manual load transfer.
VSL sklep I Cp 1793/2010
Slovenian court allows partial claim for court fees on small value judgments without public notice.
VSM Sodba I Cp 32/2025
Appeal dismissed; court upheld first instance ruling on crop loss and debt acknowledgment validity.
VSL sklep I Cpg 663/98
Court allows appeal where theft, not force majeure, does not terminate lease under ZOR Art. 598.1.
VSL sklep I Cpg 1159/2010
Appeal allowed; first instance court erred by failing to ascertain true contractual intent under Contract Law Act.

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

Tožeča stranka sama krije stroške odgovora na pritožbo in predloga za izdajo dopolnilnega sklepa.

[JEDRO]

S tem sklepom pritožbeno sodišče dopolnjuje sodbo z odločitvijo, da tožeča stranka sama krije stroške odgovora na pritožbo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Višje sodišče je s sodbo II Cp 1406/2020 z 21. 8. 2020 zavrnilo pritožbo tožene stranke zoper sodbo Okrajnega sodišča v Ljubljani V P 1269/2019-6 s 23. 12 2019; ob tem pa ni odločilo o priglašenih stroških odgovora na pritožbo tožeče stranke.

2. S tem sklepom sodbo dopolnjuje z odločitvijo, da tožeča stranka sama krije stroške odgovora na pritožbo. Glede na vsebino izpodbijane sodbe in v pritožbi uveljavljane pritožbene razloge 1 ter vsebino odgovora na pritožbo 2 stroški slednjega ne zadostijo kriteriju potrebnosti iz 1. odstavka 155. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP). Zahteva, da stranka obseg stroškov, ki jih uveljavlja od nasprotne stranke, skrči, na tisto najmanjšo mero, ko je še mogoče učinkovito varstvo njenih lastnih interesov, je v skladu z načelom vestnosti in poštenja v civilnem postopku 3 , še toliko bolj v postopku v sporu majhne vrednosti.

3. Pravkar zapisano je tudi razlog za odločitev, da tožeča stranka sama krije stroške predloga za izdajo dopolnilnega sklepa.

1 Šlo je za uveljavljanje pritožbenega razloga, ki v sporu majhne vrednosti ni dopusten, kar je razvidno iz obrazložitve sodbe z 21. 8. 2020.

2 Ki ni izpostavil ničesar pravno relevantnega.

3 Betetto, N., v: Pravdni postopek, zakon s komentarjem, 2. knjiga, Uradni list in GV Založba, 2006, stran 22.