Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep III DoR 23/2025 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2025:III.DOR.23.2025 AI generated

Appeal review request dismissed as civil claim under 2,800 EUR constitutes a small-value dispute excluding appellate review.

Case Number VSRS Sklep III DoR 23/2025
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 second-instance judgment. The underlying claim for 2,800.21 EUR was classified as a small-value dispute under the Code of Civil Procedure. Consequently, the court ruled that appellate review is statutorily excluded for such cases, rendering the request inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Osmi odstavek 458. člena ZPP; prvi odstavek 443. člena ZPP: In small-value disputes, appellate review is explicitly excluded, and therefore a request for permission to appeal cannot be granted.

Keywords

AI generated
small-value dispute appellate review exclusion Code of Civil Procedure permission to appeal civil claim threshold

Cited Legislation

AI generated
8th paragraph of Article 458 of the Code of Civil Procedure
1st paragraph of Article 443 of the Code of Civil Procedure
2nd paragraph of Article 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure
7th paragraph of Article 324 of the Code of Civil Procedure

Cited Case Law

AI generated
VSRS II DoR 246/2023
1 Enako stališče je zavzeto v zadevah VSRS II DoR 246/2023 z dne 19.
VSRS II DoR 309/2024
AI generated
VSM sklep Cpg 215/97
Appeal allowed; counterclaim admissible under ZPP s. 189 despite potential set-off prohibition in transport terms.
Sodba VIII Ips 23/2013
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; employee's refusal to drive without personal items constitutes gross breach justifying immediate termination.
VSL sodba I Cpg 362/99
Court allows partial claim against carrier where general terms override bill of lading clauses on freight payment responsibility.
Sklep III DoR 75/2013
Supreme Court dismisses appeal permission request as statutory conditions under ZPP Art. 367a were not met.
Sklep Dsp 123/2008
Appeal dismissed because plaintiff failed to prove deviation from Supreme Court practice or lack of uniformity.

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]

Tožbeni zahtevek se nanaša na denarno terjatev v višini 2.800,21 EUR, zato gre za spor majhne vrednosti. Osmi odstavek 458. člena ZPP izrecno določa, da v sporih majhne vrednosti ni revizije.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrnilo pritožbo tožeče stranke in potrdilo izpodbijano sodbo sodišča prve stopnje v III. in IV. točki izreka. Zavrnilo je stališče tožeče stranke, da je tožena stranka pri izvajanju kurirske storitve ravnala s hudo malomarnostjo.

2. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje vlaga tožeča stranka predlog za dopustitev revizije.

3. Predlog ni dovoljen.

4. V konkretni zadevi se tožbeni zahtevek nanaša na denarno terjatev v višini 2.800,21 EUR, zato gre za spor majhne vrednosti (prvi odstavek 443. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku, v nadaljevanju ZPP). Osmi odstavek 458. člena ZPP izrecno določa, da v sporih majhne vrednosti ni revizije.

5. Ker v postopkih v sporih majhne vrednosti ni revizije, je ni mogoče dopustiti (drugi odstavek 367. člena ZPP). Predlog tako ni dovoljen in ga je Vrhovno sodišče zavrglo. 1

6. Sklep je bil sprejet soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).

1 Enako stališče je zavzeto v zadevah VSRS II DoR 246/2023 z dne 19. 7. 2023 in II DoR 309/2024 z dne 16. 10. 2024.