Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSL Sklep I Cpg 671/2021 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2022:I.CPG.671.2021 AI generated

Appeals dismissed as parties withdrew them after reaching an out-of-court settlement.

Case Number VSL Sklep I Cpg 671/2021
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Settled / Struck from Roll
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The higher court issued a procedural ruling confirming that both parties withdrew their appeals following an out-of-court settlement. Although the first-instance judgment had awarded significant damages to the plaintiff and rejected part of the defendant's claim, the parties subsequently agreed to resolve the dispute without further litigation. Consequently, the court determined that no further adjudication was necessary and formally recorded the withdrawal of the appeals under the relevant procedural code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku 2. odst. 334. člen: When parties withdraw their appeals after a first-instance judgment has been rendered but before the higher court issues a decision, the higher court may issue a ruling confirming the withdrawal and refrain from further adjudication.

Keywords

AI generated
withdrawal of appeal out-of-court settlement higher court procedure procedural ruling Zakon o pravdnem postopku

Cited Legislation

AI generated
2. odst. 334. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
VSL sodba I Cpg 92/2010
Appeal dismissed; publisher failed to act with due care regarding textbook approval deadlines.
VSL sodba II Cp 689/2015
Appeal dismissed; plaintiff failed to allege damages due to legal error despite prior warnings.
VSL sodba I Cp 4043/2009
Guarantee remains valid after debtor's bankruptcy; bankruptcy extinguishes only business debts, not personal guarantee obligations.
VSL sodba II Cp 1573/2009
Court rejects appeal in construction defect case, ruling plaster is part of building requiring strict solidity rules.
VSRS Sklep III DoR 30/2018-8
Supreme Court allows appeal regarding state liability for enforcement officer's tort under Article 26 of the Constitution.

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 stranki pritožbi umaknili.

[JEDRO]

Ker sta stranki svoji pritožbi umaknili in ker višje sodišče o pritožbah še ni izdalo odločbe, je umik pritožb po drugem odstavku 334. člena ZPP dopusten. Višje sodišče zato o pritožbah ne bo odločalo, izdalo pa je ugotovitveni sklep o umiku pritožbe.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Z izpodbijano sodbo je sodišče prve stopnje toženi stranki naložilo v plačilo 115.659,64 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 9. 3. 2015, zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek za plačilo 40.472,10 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 7. 3. 2015 ter za plačilo zakonskih zamudnih obresti od zneska 115.659,20 EUR za čas od 7. 3. 2015 do 8. 3. 2015. Toženi stranki je naložilo povrnitev pravdnih stroškov tožeče stranke v višini 6.605,43 EUR.

2. Zoper ugodilni del zahtevka in stroškovno odločitev se je pritožila tožena stranka, zoper zavrnilni del zahtevka in stroškovno odločitev pa se je pritožila tožeča stranka.

3. Z vlogama z dne 1. 3. 2022 sta stranki višjemu sodišču sporočili, da sta dosegli izvensodno poravnavo in zato obe svoji pritožbi umikata. Ker višje sodišče o pritožbah še ni izdalo odločbe, je umik pritožb po drugem odstavku 334. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku dopusten. Višje sodišče zato o pritožbah ne bo odločalo, izdalo pa je ugotovitveni sklep o umiku pritožbe.