Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 194/2023 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2023:II.DOR.194.2023 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses revision request regarding child support payment methods when child lives separately.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 194/2023
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 for permission to appeal a decision denying an increase in child support. The applicant sought to change payment terms, arguing whether a child support obligor must pay in cash or can fulfill obligations by covering the child's expenses directly. The court found the conditions for allowing a revision under the relevant procedural laws were not met, as the lower courts had already correctly applied the existing legal framework.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

367.a ZPP; 37 ZNP-1: A revision request is inadmissible when the lower court's decision does not violate the law or when the specific legal question raised does not meet the statutory criteria for admissibility under the Civil Procedure Act and the Non-Contentious Procedure Act.

Keywords

AI generated
child support obligation revision request admissibility cash payment requirement direct expense coverage Supreme Court review non-contentious procedure separate household living

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a ZPP
37 ZNP-1
367.c ZPP
324 ZPP
AI generated
VSRS Sklep I R 161/2020
Supreme Court dismisses transfer of jurisdiction in child custody case due to plaintiff's choice of court.
VSL Sklep IV Cp 781/2024
Appeal court raises child support from 350 to 380 EUR per child and awards costs to applicant.
VSRS Sklep II DoR 243/2021
Supreme Court dismisses review application as statutory conditions for review permission were not met.
VSRS sklep II DoR 284/2011
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on maintenance, rejecting arguments about property value and procedural fairness.
VSL Sklep IV Cp 682/2017
Appeal allowed; first-instance court erred by ignoring inheritance and bank evidence showing increased support ability.

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. Predlagateljica je vložila predlog za zvišanje, s sodno poravnavo dogovorjene preživnine, in sicer s 190 EUR na 649,11 EUR mesečno.

2. Sodišče prve stopnje je njen predlog zavrnilo.

3. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo predlagateljice zavrnilo in potrdilo sklep sodišča prve stopnje.

4. Zoper sklep sodišča druge stopnje je predlagateljica vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije, v katerem zastavlja naslednje vprašanje: Ali je preživninski zavezanec preživninsko obveznost, v kolikor otroka ne preživlja v svojem gospodinjstvu, dolžan izpolnjevati tako, da v mesečnem znesku, opredeljenem v denarju, preživnino plačuje preživninskemu upravičencu oz. v primeru otroka njegovemu zakonitemu zastopniku, ali pa lahko svojo preživninsko obveznost izpolni tudi nadomestno, tako da sam ali preko tretjih oseb krije del potreb preživninskega upravičenca?

5. Predlog ni utemeljen.

6. Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) v v zvezi s 37. členom Zakona o nepravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPN-1) niso podani, zato je Vrhovno sodišče predlog zavrnilo (drugi odstavek 367.c člena ZPP v zvezi s 37. členom ZNP-1).

7. Vrhovno sodišče je odločalo v senatu, navedenem v uvodu sklepa. Odločbo je sprejelo soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP v zvezi s 37. členom ZNP-1).