Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep III DoR 87/2021 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:III.DOR.87.2021 AI generated

Supreme Court allows review regarding landlord's duty to pay management costs to tenant.

Case Number VSRS Sklep III DoR 87/2021
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 permission for a review of the second-instance judgment concerning a dispute between a business space owner and a tenant. The lower courts ruled that the owner must reimburse the tenant for operational, technical management, and maintenance costs incurred during the lease period. The court permitted the review because the specific question of whether the owner was exempt from these payment obligations in this particular case meets the statutory criteria for appellate review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku (ZPP), 367.a odst. 1: A review is permitted when the first-instance court's decision on the admissibility of the review request is based on a misinterpretation of the law or a violation of procedural rules, specifically regarding the exemption of a property owner from paying management costs to a tenant.

Keywords

AI generated
review admissibility landlord tenant dispute management costs maintenance expenses ZPP review criteria

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a odst. 1 ZPP
324. odst. 7 ZPP
AI generated
sodba III Ips 15/2000
Supreme Court dismisses appeal in commercial dispute where appeal was inadmissible due to low value threshold. Appeal rejected as grounds were not substantiated and no prior judgment existed. Court applied 1977 Civil Procedure Code regarding appeal value limits.
VSRS Sodba III Ips 1/2022
Court rejects appeal; landlord remains liable for building costs absent tenant's explicit debt assumption consent.
VSL Sodba II Cp 186/2023
Appeal dismissed; minor value dispute requires strict procedural rules and majority voting for co-owners. Appeal dismissed; minor value dispute requires strict procedural rules and majority voting for co-owners.
VSL Sodba I Cpg 66/2020
Appeal dismissed; appellant failed to prove grounds for revoking the court's recognition of standing. The court rejected the claim that land registry errors justified the revocation. The decision upholds the lower court's ruling on management fees. The court emphasized the burden of proof for revoking recognition. The ruling clarifies the standard for proving standing errors. The judgment confirms the lower court's decision on fees. The appeal was rejected due to lack of sufficient grounds.
Sodba III Ips 19/2011
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; interim discovery claim lacks prejudice after execution completed.

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 se je tožena stranka kot lastnica poslovnega prostora v okoliščinah konkretnega primera v razmerju do upravnika (tožeče stranke) razbremenila svoje dolžnosti plačila stroškov upravljanja, vzdrževanja in obratovanja stavbe.

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali se je tožena stranka kot lastnica poslovnega prostora v okoliščinah konkretnega primera v razmerju do upravnika (tožeče stranke) razbremenila svoje dolžnosti plačila stroškov upravljanja, vzdrževanja in obratovanja stavbe.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je v delu, relevantnem za odločitev o predlogu za dopustitev revizije, ugodilo zahtevku upravnice poslovne stavbe zoper lastnico poslovnega prostora za povračilo stroškov obratovanja, tehničnega upravljanja in vzdrževanja. Stroški se nanašajo na poslovni prostor, ki je bi v vtoževanem obdobju, predmet najema (II.b točka izreka).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožene stranke v bistvenem zavrnilo in delno (za znesek 11.707,62 EUR) potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje (I. točka izreka).

3. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje tožena 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 (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).