Legislator Case Law & Legislation
VSRS Sklep III Ips 36/2020 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:III.IPS.36.2020 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal because the appellant withdrew the appeal before a final decision was rendered.

Case Number VSRS Sklep III Ips 36/2020
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia ruled that the appellant withdrew their appeal before the court issued a final decision. Although the lower courts had rejected the claim for payment and the appeal against that judgment, the appellant voluntarily withdrew the appeal to the Supreme Court on February 2, 2021. Consequently, the Supreme Court determined that no further adjudication was necessary and simply recorded the withdrawal as the procedural outcome.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 334, paragraph 2 in conjunction with Article 383 of the Code of Civil Procedure; A party may withdraw an appeal filed with the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia before the court renders a decision, thereby precluding any further ruling on the merits.

Keywords

AI generated
withdrawal of appeal supreme court procedure code of civil procedure procedural dismissal voluntary withdrawal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 334, paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 383 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated

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 je tožeča stranka revizijo umaknila.

[JEDRO]

Dokler Vrhovno sodišče ne izda odločbe, lahko stranka umakne že vloženo revizijo. Vrhovno sodišče zato le ugotovi, da je revizija umaknjena.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek za plačilo kupnine16.512.698,12 EUR po Pogodbi o odstopu terjatev z dne 30. 12. 2016 (V. točka izreka).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožeče stranke zavrnilo in potrdilo izpodbijano sodbo.

3. Vrhovno sodišče je s sklepom III DoR 15/2020-8 z dne 10. 3. 2020 na predlog tožeče stranke dopustilo revizijo glede vprašanja, ali sta sodišči nižjih stopenj pravilno uporabili določbo četrtega odstavka 5. člena Pogodbe o odstopu terjatev z dne 30. 12. 2016.

4. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje je tožeča stranka vložila revizijo zaradi zmotne uporabe materialnega prava, nato pa je z vlogo z dne 2. 2. 2021 revizijo umaknila. Ker revizijsko sodišče še ni izdalo odločbe, je umik revizije po drugem odstavku 334. člena v zvezi s 383. členom Zakona o pravdnem postopku dopusten in upošteven, zaradi česar revizijsko sodišče o reviziji ne bo odločalo.