Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 515/2005 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2007:II.IPS.276.2007 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal because the disputed claim amount falls below the statutory review threshold. The appeal is inadmissible as the value does not exceed the required limit. The court applies the review threshold rule to reject the appeal. The appeal is inadmissible due to the claim value being under the statutory limit. The court rejects the appeal based on the claim amount failing to meet the review threshold. The appeal is dismissed because the disputed value is below the legal review threshold. The court rejects the appeal as the claim value does not exceed the statutory limit. The appeal is inadmissible since the disputed amount is below the required review threshold. The court dismisses the appeal because the claim value is under the statutory review threshold.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 515/2005
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 dismissed the appeal, ruling that the disputed portion of the claim did not exceed the statutory review threshold. The appellant sought a higher compensation for non-material damage, arguing the first-instance court undervalued the harm, but the reviewable amount was calculated at 3,463.52 EUR. The court rejected the appeal under Article 377 of the Code of Civil Procedure because this sum failed to meet the minimum threshold of 4,172.92 EUR required for appellate review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367, paragraph 2; Article 377 of the Code of Civil Procedure: An appeal is inadmissible if the value of the disputed part of the claim does not exceed the statutory review threshold.

Keywords

AI generated
review threshold appeal inadmissibility non-material damage civil procedure code statutory limit supreme court review claim valuation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367, paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 377 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
Sodba II Ips 293/2010
Supreme Court partially allows noise nuisance claim, reducing damages based on individualized assessment principles.
Sodba II Ips 408/97
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on non-material damage compensation for physical pain and mental suffering from contamination.
VSK sodba I Cp 60/2001
Asbestos dust deemed dangerous activity; liability established unless defendant proves no causation under ZOR s. 173.
VSL sodba I Cp 2410/2009
Workplace injury compensation partially allowed; court reduced damages for pain and fear while upholding disfigurement award.
Sodba II Ips 202/2004
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on damages for non-material harm where defendant's self-defense claim failed and plaintiff's contributory negligence was limited.

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

Revizija se zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Z revizijo izpodbijani del tožbenega zahtevka ne presega revizijskega praga, je revizija nedovoljena in jo je moralo revizijsko sodišče zavreči (377. člen ZPP).

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je razsodilo, da mora tožena stranka tožeči stranki plačati 870.000 SIT (3.630,44 EUR) odškodnine z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 26.8.2004 do plačila in ji povrniti pravdne stroške. Višji tožbeni zahtevek je zavrnilo.

Pritožbeno sodišče je pritožbo tožeče stranke zavrnilo in v zavrnilnem delu potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje.

Zoper to sodbo je tožeča stranka vložila revizijo zaradi bistvenih kršitev določb pravdnega postopka in zmotne uporabe materialnega prava. Po njenem mnenju je sodišče kršilo materialna določila o individualizaciji škodnega dogodka in ji odmerilo prenizko odškodnino za vse uveljavljane oblike nepremoženjske škode.

Revizija je bila vročena Vrhovnemu državnemu tožilstvu Republike Slovenije in toženi stranki, ki nanjo ni odgovorila.

Revizija ni dovoljena.

Revizija je dovoljena zoper pravnomočno sodbo, če vrednost izpodbijanega dela presega 4.172,92 EUR (prej 1,000.000 SIT, drugi odstavek 367. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (Uradni list RS, št. 73/07 - Ur.p.b., ZPP). Tožeča stranka je sprva s tožbo iz naslova nepremoženjske škode vtoževala 2,100.000 SIT, po delnem umiku z vlogo z dne 9.6.2004, pa 1,700.000 SIT. Z revizijo izpodbijani del tožbenega zahtevka, upoštevajoč prisojeni znesek na prvih dveh stopnjah sojenja, znaša 3.463,52 EUR (830.000 SIT). Ker ne presega revizijskega praga, je revizija nedovoljena in jo je moralo revizijsko sodišče zavreči (377. člen ZPP).