Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep III DoR 108/2021 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:III.DOR.108.2021 AI generated

Appeal against costs ruling dismissed because costs decision does not end proceedings legally.

Case Number VSRS Sklep III DoR 108/2021
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court rejected the applicant's request to permit a revision against the second-instance court's ruling on litigation costs. The lower court had dismissed the creditor's appeal and confirmed the first-instance decision, assigning each party their own appeal costs. The court ruled that a costs ruling is merely accessory to the main dispute resolution and does not legally conclude the proceedings, thereby precluding a revision under the relevant procedural law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

ZPP 384. odst. 1; ZPP 377. člen: A ruling on litigation costs is accessory to the main judgment and does not legally conclude the proceedings; therefore, a revision against such a ruling is not permitted.

Keywords

AI generated
litigation costs accessory nature procedural conclusion revision appeal second instance court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
ZPP 384. odst. 1
ZPP 377. člen
ZPP 324. odst. 7
AI generated
VSL sklep I Cpg 1181/2010
Appeal allowed; first-instance court's cost award dismissed due to lack of reasoning violating procedural rules.
VSL Sodba V Cpg 458/2018
Appeal dismissed; share of collective management organization's pool cannot determine private reproduction damages.
VSM sklep II Cp 2626/2006
Appeal allowed; creditor must pay debtor half of legal costs and objection fees under ZPP and ZIZ.
VSL Sklep I Cpg 382/2022
Appeal dismissed; withdrawal of claim without defendant's acceptance of debt results in plaintiff bearing costs under ZPP Art. 158(1).
VSL Sklep I Cpg 175/2019
Appeal dismissed; side intervenient cannot override principal party's procedural decisions like withdrawal of claim.

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 zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Ker sklep o stroških ni sklep, s katerim se je postopek pravnomočno končal, revizija zoper tak sklep ni dovoljena.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrnilo pritožbo upnika in potrdilo prvostopenjski sklep. Odločilo je še, da vsaka stranka sama trpi svoje pritožbene stroške.

2. Zoper odločitev o stroških pritožbenega postopka vlaga dolžnik predlog za dopustitev revizije.

3. Predlog ni dovoljen.

4. V skladu s prvim odstavkom 384. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP), ki se v postopku izvršbe in zavarovanja v skladu s 15. členom Zakona o izvršbi in zavarovanju uporablja smiselno, stranke lahko vložijo revizijo tudi zoper sklep sodišča druge stopnje, s katerim je bil postopek pravnomočno končan. Odločitev o povrnitvi stroškov je zgolj akcesorne narave in je odvisna od odločitve o sporu ter s tem v zvezi od uspeha posamezne stranke v njem. Ker torej sklep o stroških ni sklep, s katerim se je postopek pravnomočno končal, revizija zoper tak sklep ni dovoljena, zato je Vrhovno sodišče predlog za dopustitev revizije zavrglo (377. člen ZPP).

5. Sklep je bil sprejet soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).