Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 78/2005 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2005:I.R.78.2005 AI generated

Court rejects transfer of venue based solely on complainant's dissatisfaction with specific judges.

Case Number Sklep I R 78/2005
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The defendant requested a transfer of the case to another court due to alleged bias by judges in the Ljubljana District Court. The Supreme Court found this dissatisfaction insufficient to meet the statutory requirements for changing venue. Consequently, the request was dismissed because personal grievances do not constitute the clear reasons mandated by law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure; A party's dissatisfaction with specific judges does not constitute a valid ground for transferring a case to another court unless it is evident that the proceedings would be conducted more easily or other significant reasons exist.

Keywords

AI generated
transfer of venue judicial bias civil procedure law change of court party's dissatisfaction

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated
Sklep I R 148/2008
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction based solely on a general claim to a fair trial.
VSRS sklep I R 150/2014
Dolžnik je v pritožbi zoper sklep Okrajnega sodišča v Radovljici In 86/2006 z dne 9.
VSRS Sklep III R 30/2025
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction due to appearance of bias from connected court's alleged misconduct.
VSRS Sklep I R 164/2021
Supreme Court transfers case jurisdiction due to compromised impartiality appearance between plaintiff judge and court judges.
VSRS Sklep III R 24/2022
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction request based on alleged judicial bias and lack of natural judge rights.

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

Predlogu se ne ugodi.

[JEDRO]

Predlagateljevo nezadovoljstvo v zvezi s sodniki določenega sodišča ne predstavlja razloga za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Toženec je predlagal določitev drugega "stvarno in krajevno pristojnega sodišča", ker je prepričan, da Okrožno sodišče v Kranju o njegovih zadevah "ni sposobno sodelovati niti pošteno niti nepristransko", ker ima predlagatelj slabe izkušnje z določenimi sodniki navedenega sodišča v dosedanjih sodnih postopkih.

Predlog ni utemeljen.

Po 67. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku - ZPP, Vrhovno sodišče lahko na predlog stranke ali pristojnega sodišča določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče za izvedbo postopka, če je očitno, da se bo tako laže opravil postopek, ali če so za to drugi tehtni razlogi.

Predlagateljevo nezadovoljstvo v zvezi s kranjskimi sodniki ne sovpada z nobeno od predpostavk iz 67. člena ZPP in zato predlogu ni mogoče ugoditi.