Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 514/2023 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2024:II.DOR.514.2023 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses lay revision request due to lack of legal representative capacity.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 514/2023
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 a lay application for permission to appeal a lower court decision. The debtor's legal representative filed the request without being a lawyer or holding a legal qualification. The court ruled that such extraordinary procedural actions require representation by a licensed attorney unless the filer possesses a legal degree.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

86. člen ZPP; 367. člen ZPP: A party may only perform procedural acts in extraordinary legal proceedings through a licensed attorney, unless the party themselves holds a legal qualification.

Keywords

AI generated
lay application permission to appeal legal representative capacity extraordinary legal remedies ZPP attorney requirement

Cited Legislation

AI generated
86. člen ZPP
367. člen ZPP
324. člen ZPP
AI generated
VSRS Sklep II DoR 276/2016
Inadmissible appeal against final inheritance ruling due to lack of lawyer qualification and no review right.
VSL Sklep II Cp 383/2023
Appeal dismissed; transitional law applies to proceedings where first-instance judgment was issued after new procedural code.
UPRS Sodba I U 1864/2021-7
Administrative court dismisses free legal aid claim due to applicant's failure to substantiate prospects of success.
VSL sklep II Cp 3381/2010
Appeal dismissed because civil revision was inadmissible as the disputed value was under 40,000 EUR.
Sklep II DoR 299/2012
Appeal against Supreme Court's rejection of revision request is inadmissible due to lack of lawyer and missing documents.

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 zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Predlog za dopustitev revizije je zaradi pomanjkanja postulacijske sposobnosti nedovoljen.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Dolžnik je po svojem zakonitem zastopniku zoper sklep Višjega sodišča v Ljubljani I Ip 1199/2023 z dne 6. 11. 2023 vložil laičen predlog za dopustitev revizije.

2. Predlog ni dovoljen.

3. Vložitev predloga za dopustitev revizije je del postopka z izrednimi pravnimi sredstvi, v katerem lahko stranka opravlja pravdna dejanja samo po pooblaščencu, ki je odvetnik (tretji odstavek 86. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku, v nadaljevanju ZPP), sama pa le v primeru, če ima opravljen pravniški državni izpit (četrti odstavek 86. člena ZPP). V obravnavanem primeru je zakoniti zastopnik dolžnika predlog za dopustitev revizije vložil sam, pri čemer ni izkazal, da bi imel opravljen pravniški državni izpit. Vrhovno sodišče je zato njegov predlog na podlagi določbe 367.č člena ZPP zavrglo.

4. Vrhovno sodišče je odločalo v senatu, ki je naveden v uvodu tega sklepa. Odločitev je sprejelo soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).