Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 45/2023 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2023:II.DOR.45.2023 AI generated

Supreme Court rejects review application as statutory conditions for admissibility were not met.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 45/2023
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 to allow a review of the second-instance judgment. The applicant argued that the lower courts erred in denying a lump-sum compensation for a bionic arm, claiming a lack of precedent on valuing such material damage. The court dismissed the request because the applicant failed to satisfy the specific admissibility criteria outlined in the relevant procedural law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

367.a ZPP; 367.c ZPP: A review application is inadmissible if the applicant fails to demonstrate that the lower court's decision violates the law or constitutes a significant procedural error.

Keywords

AI generated
review application admissibility bionic arm compensation material damage valuation Supreme Court review procedural error threshold

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a ZPP
367.c ZPP
324 ZPP
AI generated
VSL Sodba II Cp 1923/2022
Appeal partially allowed; court awards statutory interest and adjusts litigation costs based on partial success.
VSRS sklep II DoR 164/2014
Supreme Court dismisses appeal request as individual claims under 2000 EUR limit do not aggregate for review.
VSL Sklep I Cpg 604/2018
Appeal dismissed; party failed to prove inability to pay court fees without endangering business activity.
VSL sodba I Cp 880/99
Appeal dismissed; court upheld insurance coverage start date and pain/loss damages under ZOR. Appeal dismissed; court upheld insurance coverage start date and pain/loss damages under ZOR.
Sodba in sklep II Ips 39/2008
Appeal dismissed; mere failure to interview expert witness is not a fundamental procedural violation under ZPP.

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 za dopustitev revizije se zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Predlog se zavrne.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je (v delu, relevantnem za postopek dopustitve revizije) zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek, da je dolžna toženka tožniku plačevati od pravnomočnosti sodbe, vsakih nadaljnjih pet let, do smrti tožnika, rento za nakup bionične proteze v višini 116.296,31 EUR, usklajeno s stopnjo rasti življenjskih stroškov v RS, z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi, ki tečejo od pravnomočnosti sodbe oziroma od zapadlosti vsakega posameznega obroka do plačila (III. točka izreka).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožnika v tem delu zavrnilo in sodbo sodišča prve stopnje potrdilo (drugi odstavek I. točke izreka).

3. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje tožnik vlaga predlog za dopustitev revizije in navaja, da Vrhovno sodišče nima sodne prakse glede dokazovanja višine materialne škode z nakupom bionične roke, v zvezi s čimer predlaga dopustitev revizije. Trdi, da je odločitev sodišč o zavrnitvi tožbenega zahtevka v tem delu materialnopravno in procesnopravno napačna.

4. Predlog ni utemeljen.

5. Ker niso izpolnjeni pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP), je Vrhovno sodišče na podlagi drugega odstavka 367.c člena ZPP tožnikov predlog zavrnilo.

6. Senat je odločitev sprejel soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).