Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 201/2021 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:II.DOR.201.2021 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal application withdrawal request as procedural rules allow withdrawal before final decision.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 201/2021
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 dismissed the applicants' request to withdraw their appeal application. Although the applicants withdrew their request on May 17, 2021, the court ruled that under Article 383 of the Civil Procedure Act, provisions regarding appeals apply to appeal applications, allowing withdrawal before a final ruling. Consequently, the court formally noted the withdrawal but did not grant the request to dismiss the appeal application itself.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 383 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 334, paragraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act: In appeal proceedings, appeal provisions apply to appeal applications, permitting a party to withdraw an appeal application before the court of second instance issues a decision.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act appeal application withdrawal of appeal second instance court procedural withdrawal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 383 of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 334, paragraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
VDSS Sodba Pdp 324/2021
Appeal dismissed; military employee rejected severance due to refusal of job transfer offer.
VSL sodba II Cp 2072/2015
Tenant's claim dismissed; court upheld first instance ruling on lease validity and rent usage.
VDSS sklep Pdp 765/2016
Higher court overturns lower court ruling on university teacher pay, remanding case due to erroneous legal interpretation of teaching hours.
VSL sodba I Cp 2930/2015
Co-ownership cohabitation denial of access does not constitute consent to deprivation of usage rights.
Sodba II Ips 365/2006
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on construction contract dispute, upholding lower court's finding of delay liability.

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

Ugotovi se, da sta predlagatelja predlog za dopustitev revizije umaknila.

[JEDRO]

V postopku z revizijo se na podlagi 383. člena ZPP smiselno uporabljajo določbe ZPP o pritožbi zoper sodbo, med drugim tudi določba drugega odstavka 334. člena ZPP, v skladu s katero lahko stranka umakne že vloženo pritožbo, dokler sodišče druge stopnje ne izda odločbe.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je deloma (glede zneska 53.179,98 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi) ugodilo tožbenemu zahtevku za plačilo uporabnine, v presežku pa zahtevek zavrnilo. Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrnilo pritožbo prve toženke in drugega toženca in potrdilo izpodbijani sklep.

2. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje sta prva toženka in drugi toženec vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije.

3. Z vlogo z dne 17. 5. 2021 sta predlagatelja predlog za dopustitev revizije umaknila.

4. V postopku z revizijo se na podlagi 383. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) smiselno uporabljajo določbe ZPP o pritožbi zoper sodbo, med drugim tudi določba drugega odstavka 334. člena ZPP, v skladu s katero lahko stranka umakne že vloženo pritožbo, dokler sodišče druge stopnje ne izda odločbe. Vrhovno sodišče v obravnavani zadevi do umika predloga za dopustitev revizije o njem še ni odločilo, zato je takšno razpolaganje dopustno. Vrhovno sodišče je na podlagi navedenih zakonskih določil ugotovilo umik predloga za dopustitev revizije.

5. V uvodu odločbe navedeni senat je odločitev sprejel soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).