Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep III DoR 131/2020-8 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2020:III.DOR.131.2020.8 AI generated

Supreme Court allows review to determine if insured's gross negligence is proven by insurer's prior site inspection.

Case Number VSRS Sklep III DoR 131/2020-8
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 granted the review request regarding whether the insured committed gross negligence by failing to ensure safe construction, despite the insurer having inspected the site beforehand. The first and second instance courts dismissed the claim for insurance compensation totaling over 40,000 EUR. The court decided to allow the review because the specific question of whether the insurer's prior inspection negates the claim of gross negligence meets the statutory criteria for appellate review under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku, 367.a odst. 1: The Supreme Court may permit a review when the lower court's decision concerns a question of fact or law that is not sufficiently clear or when the decision is based on a manifestly erroneous assessment of the circumstances, specifically regarding whether an insured party's gross negligence is established despite the insurer's prior inspection of the object.

Keywords

AI generated
gross negligence insurance liability insurer inspection construction safety review of judgment Code of Civil Procedure supreme court jurisdiction

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a odst. 1 Zakona o pravdnem postopku
324. odst. 7 Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
VSC sodba Cpg 400/2014
Insurance claim dismissed; compensation cannot exceed loss, and restoration requires repair, not just replacement.
VSL sodba I Cpg 280/2006
Appeal court reverses first instance, holding product shape is not a distinguishing sign under ZVK if only functional.
VSL sodba II Cp 1937/2016
Court partially allowed appeal, ordering defendant to pay legal costs for free legal aid recipient to state budget.
VSRS Sodba in sklep II Ips 103/2018
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on business tort liability due to lack of proven causal link between breach and damages.
VSM Sodba I Cp 524/2019
Appeal dismissed; past timber cutting within 10-year quota negates claim of loss from denied cutting in 2014-2015.

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 vprašanja, ali je glede na okoliščine primera zavarovancu mogoče očitati grobo malomarnost, ker naj ne bi poskrbel za ustrezno varno izgradnjo objekta, pri čemer si je tožena stranka kot zavarovalnica pred samim zavarovanjem objekt ogledala?

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali je glede na okoliščine primera zavarovancu mogoče očitati grobo malomarnost, ker naj ne bi poskrbel za ustrezno varno izgradnjo objekta, pri čemer si je tožena stranka kot zavarovalnica pred samim zavarovanjem objekt ogledala

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je v ponovnem sojenju zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek za plačilo zavarovalnine za škodo z dne 24. 1. 2014 na zavarovanem objektu in ograji v višini 40.125,80 EUR skupaj z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 10. 2. 2014 do plačila in povrnitev stroškov postopka (I. točka izreka).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožeče stranke zavrnilo in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje (I. točka izreka).

3. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje tožeča stranka vlaga predlog za dopustitev revizije.

4. Vrhovno sodišče ugotavlja, da so izpolnjeni pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) glede vprašanja, opredeljenega v izreku sklepa. Revizijo je zato v tem obsegu dopustilo.

5. Senat je odločitev sprejel soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).