Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 568/2020 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:II.DOR.568.2020 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses review application as statutory conditions for admissibility were not met.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 568/2020
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 third defendant's application for leave to appeal, ruling that the statutory conditions under Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act were not satisfied. The lower courts had partially awarded a claim for rent arrears and rejected a counterclaim regarding overcharged rent, leading to the third defendant's dissatisfaction. The Supreme Court determined that the case did not raise a significant legal issue requiring uniform interpretation or development of law, thus denying the review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act; A review application is admissible only if it is expected to decide on a legal issue of significant importance for legal certainty, uniform application of law, or legal development.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act leave to appeal review application admissibility criteria legal certainty uniform application of law third defendant

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 367c of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 324 of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
VSM Sodba in sklep I Cp 497/2020
Appeal dismissed; co-owner's usage fee claim upheld against non-owner tenant co-owner. Court rejected insufficient evidence for rent overpayment and investment claims.
VSK sodba Cpg 201/2008
Appeal dismissed; tenant failed to prove rent reduction claim and submitted inadmissible expert evidence.
VSC Sklep Cp 378/2020
Appeal court vacates first instance judgment due to lack of lis pendens and procedural errors in claim assessment.
VSL sodba II Cp 3987/2008
Appeal dismissed; eviction order delayed 60-90 days post-termination to protect tenant rights under SZ-1.
VSL sodba I Cpg 313/2011
Appeal dismissed; claim for transport contract rescission and damages rejected due to lack of evidence.

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 tožničinemu zahtevku za plačilo uporabnine delno ugodilo in naložilo tretji toženki plačilo zneska 7.829,80 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od posameznih prisojenih zneskov. V presežku je tožbeni zahtevek zavrnilo. Zavrglo je pobotni ugovor tretje toženke iz naslova preveč plačanih pobranih najemnin in ugotovilo, da ne obstoji terjatev tretje toženke do tožnice v višini 6.344,00 EUR iz naslova vlaganj v stanovanje št. 6 na naslovu ...

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tretje toženke zavrnilo.

3. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje je tretje toženka vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije.

4. Predlog ni utemeljen.

5. Vrhovno sodišče dopusti revizijo, če je od njegove odločitve mogoče pričakovati odločitev o pravnem vprašanju, pomembnem za zagotovitev pravne varnosti, enotne uporabe prava ali za razvoj prava preko sodne prakse (prvi odstavek 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku, v nadaljevanju ZPP). 1 Vrhovno sodišče je ugotovilo, da navedeni pogoji za dopustitev revizije niso podani, zato je predlog zavrnilo (drugi odstavek 367.c člena ZPP). Senat je odločitev sprejel soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).

1 Uradni list RS, št. 26/99 s spremembami in dopolnitvami.