Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 393/2022 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2022:II.DOR.393.2022 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal for leave to appeal due to lack of specific grounds under ZPP Art. 367a.1.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 393/2022
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 applicant's request for leave to appeal the second-instance court's decision. The applicant argued they were legally incompetent, but the lower court deemed their claims vague and unproven. Consequently, the Supreme Court found the statutory requirements for granting leave to appeal were not met.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 367.1 ZPP; Art. 367.c ZPP: A request for leave to appeal is inadmissible if the applicant fails to demonstrate that the second-instance court incorrectly applied the law or violated procedural rules, as vague assertions of incompetence do not satisfy the statutory threshold for review.

Keywords

AI generated
leave to appeal legal incompetence ZPP Art. 367a procedural capacity dismissal of petition

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.1 ZPP
367.c ZPP
324.7 ZPP
AI generated
VSL sklep II Cpg 145/2017
Appeal dismissed; court rules tax deferral requires proof inability to pay without harming business activity.
VSL Sklep I Cpg 782/2016
Appeal court reversed first instance dismissal, ruling environmental tax refund claim is civil, not administrative.
VSL Sklep II Cp 2447/2018
Appeal against a final judgment is inadmissible; appeal against a non-appealable ruling is dismissed.
VSL sklep II Cp 2866/2014
Court dismisses appeal because public funding tender is a public law matter, not civil, barring civil court jurisdiction.
VSK sodba I Cp 468/2004
Appeal dismissed; mere claim of mental incapacity without specific facts or expert evidence fails to overturn settlement.

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]

Predlog se zavrne.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je izdalo zamudno sodbo, s katero je toženki naložilo, da v 60 dneh izprazni bivalno enoto v večstanovanjski stavbi. Toženka je zoper zamudno sodbo po pooblaščenki odvetnici vložila pritožbo, v kateri navaja, da je pravdno nesposobna. Sodišče druge stopnje je toženkino pritožbo zavrnilo in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje. Glede pravdne (ne)sposobnosti je navedlo, da so toženkine navedbe pavšalne in nekonkretizirane ter jih ni mogoče pritožbeno preizkusiti.

2. Predlog za dopustitev revizije zoper odločitev sodišča druge stopnje vlaga toženka. Predlaga dopustitev revizije zaradi odločitve o pravnem vprašanju: Ali je drugostopenjsko sodišče pravilno presodilo, da je tožena stranka pravdno in procesno popolnoma sposobna?

3. Predlog ni utemeljen.

4. Vrhovno sodišče je ugotovilo, da glede vprašanj v predlogu niso podani pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP). Zato je predlog za dopustitev revizije zavrnilo (367.c člen ZPP).

5. Vrhovno sodišče je odločalo v senatu, navedenem v uvodu sklepa. Odločbo je sprejelo soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).