Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 531/2023 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2025:II.DOR.531.2023 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses lay objection to court fee order unless applicant holds a lawyer's license.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 531/2023
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 layperson's objection to a court fee order issued for a revision application. The applicant failed to submit proof of having completed the state bar exam, which is a mandatory requirement for filing such objections under the Code of Civil Procedure. Consequently, the court ruled that the applicant lacked procedural capacity to act without a licensed attorney.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

86. člen ZPP; 367. člen ZPP: In proceedings for extraordinary legal remedies, a party may only perform procedural acts through a licensed attorney unless they or their legal representative have completed the state bar exam; failure to prove this results in the rejection of the act.

Keywords

AI generated
procedural capacity state bar exam court fee order extraordinary remedies licensed attorney ZPP provisions lay objection

Cited Legislation

AI generated
86. člen ZPP
367. člen ZPP

Cited Case Law

AI generated
II DoR 7/2022
Supreme Court dismisses lay party's objection to court fee order due to lack of legal qualification.
AI generated
VSRS Sklep II DoR 429/2024
Supreme Court dismisses court fee order against applicant granted free legal aid for revision application.
VSRS Sklep Cp 35/2018
Supreme Court dismisses appeal against court fee for leave of appeal, ruling it does not violate access to court rights.
VSRS Sklep X DoR 8/2025-4
Court dismisses late objection to court fee order as it was filed after the 8-day statutory deadline.
VSRS sklep II DoR 69/2015
Supreme Court allows appeal regarding court fee exemption in denationalization cases and permits review on administrative binding scope.
Sklep VIII DoR 84/2013
Supreme Court rejects worker's fee waiver claim, ruling individual labor disputes require court fees under new law.

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

Ugovor A. A. zoper plačilni nalog za plačilo sodne takse se zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Če stranka sama vloži ugovor zoper plačilni nalog, ki ga je izdalo Vrhovno sodišče, mora imeti opravljen pravniški državni izpit, sicer se njen ugovor zavrže.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Vrhovno sodišče je 20. 1. 2025 izdalo plačilni nalog za plačilo sodne takse za predlog za dopustitev revizije.

2. Predlagatelj je pri Vrhovnem sodišču vložil laični ugovor zoper plačilni nalog II DoR 531/2023 z dne 20. 1. 2025. Potrdila o opravljenem pravniškem izpitu ni priložil.

3. Ugovor ni dovoljen.

4. V postopku z izrednimi pravnimi sredstvi (kamor sodi tudi odločanje o ugovoru zoper plačilni nalog, ki ga je izdalo Vrhovno sodišče) lahko stranka opravlja postopkovna dejanja samo po pooblaščencu, ki je odvetnik, razen če ima sama ali njen zakoniti zastopnik opravljen pravniški državni izpit (tretji in četrti odstavek 86. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku, v nadaljevanju ZPP). Če vlogi ni priložen dokaz o izpolnjevanju pogojev iz četrtega odstavka 86. člena ZPP, jo sodišče zavrže (smiselna uporaba 367.č člena ZPP). 1

5. Predlagatelj ni zatrjeval niti izkazal, da bi imel opravljen pravniški državni izpit. Za vložitev ugovora zato nima postulacijske sposobnosti. Vrhovno sodišče je zato odločilo, kot izhaja iz izreka tega sklepa.

1 Primerjaj zadevo II DoR 7/2022.