Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 50/2009 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:I.R.50.2009 AI generated

Court rules jurisdiction lies with Ljubljana District Court for commercial dispute between companies based on agreement.

Case Number Sklep I R 50/2009
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia determined that the District Court in Ljubljane has jurisdiction over the commercial dispute. Both parties are legal entities that agreed in their contract for the competent court to be the Ljubljane District Court. Consequently, the court upheld the transfer of the case from Maribor to Ljubljane based on this contractual agreement and the nature of the commercial proceeding.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku (ZPP); When parties are legal entities and have contractually agreed on a specific competent court, that court has jurisdiction over the dispute.

Keywords

AI generated
commercial dispute jurisdiction contractual court agreement legal entity parties competent court selection ZPP procedural rules

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 481, paragraph 1, point 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure (ZPP)
Article 32, paragraph 2, point 6 of the Act on Civil Procedure (ZPP)
AI generated
VSL sklep I Cpg 1446/2013
Appeal dismissed; contract validity dispute falls under general territorial jurisdiction, not exclusive mortgage court jurisdiction.
VSM Sklep IV Kp 27018/2021
Appeal dismissed; court location irrelevant when crime occurred at the other court's venue.
VSL Sklep I Cp 1392/2021
Appeal dismissed; approval of free legal aid does not suspend jurisdictional objection proceedings under ZPP.
Sklep I R 57/2013
Supreme Court transfers payment claim trial to Maribor court based on witness location and cost efficiency.
VSRS Sklep VIII R 8/2021
Supreme Court rules that a claim against the Ministry for health is a civil tort case, not a social dispute, so the district court has jurisdiction.

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

Za odločanje v tej zadevi je pristojno Okrožno sodišče v Ljubljani.

[JEDRO]

Pravdni stranki sta gospodarski družbi in zato v sporu veljajo pravila o postopku v gospodarskih sporih. Stranki sta se pogodbeno dogovorili, da bo o sporu odločalo pristojno ljubljansko sodišče in je zato glede na naravo spora pristojno Okrožno sodišče v Ljubljani.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Tožnica je vložila predlog za izvršbo pred Okrajnim sodiščem v Mariboru, toženka pa je vložila ugovor, o katerem je sodišče odločilo s sklepom In 758/2003 z dne 27. 6. 2007. S tem sklepom se je Okrajno sodišče v Mariboru izreklo za nepristojno ter sklenilo, da bo zadeva po pravnomočnosti sklepa odstopljena v reševanje Okrajnemu sodišču v Ljubljani kot pristojnemu sodišču.

2. Okrajno sodišče v Ljubljani je sprožilo spor o pristojnosti. Pravdni stranki sta družbi z omejeno odgovornostjo, kar pomeni, da gre za gospodarski spor, za sojenje v teh primerih pa so pristojna okrožna sodišča.

3. Okrajno sodišče v Ljubljani je utemeljeno sprožilo spor o pristojnosti.

4. Pravdni stranki sta gospodarski družbi in zato v sporu veljajo pravila o postopku v gospodarskih sporih.(1) Stranki sta se pogodbeno dogovorili, da bo o sporu odločalo pristojno ljubljansko sodišče in je zato glede na naravo spora pristojno Okrožno sodišče v Ljubljani.(2)

---.---

Op. št. (1): Primerjaj 1. točko prvega odstavka 481. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku - ZPP. Op. št. (2): Primerjaj 6. točko drugega odstavka 32. člena ZPP