Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 17/2007 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2008:II.IPS.1056.2007 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because the disputed property value under 1 million SIT precludes appellate review under ZPP.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 17/2007
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 appeal against the first-instance judgment regarding a property dispute involving specific parcels and a contested donation agreement. The court held that neither party's claim exceeded the monetary threshold of 1,000,000 SIT required to permit an appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure. Consequently, the appeal was inadmissible as the statutory limit for appellate jurisdiction was not met.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

drugi odstavek 367. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku; Appeal is inadmissible when the value of the disputed subject matter in both the plaintiff's and defendant's claims does not exceed 1,000,000 SIT.

Keywords

AI generated
ZPP appeal threshold monetary value limit inadmissible appeal civil procedure code property dispute value

Cited Legislation

AI generated
drugi odstavek 367. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
377. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
VSL Sodba I Cp 238/2021
Appeal dismissed; court upheld trial judgment on contract validity and costs based on reasonableness principle.
Sodba II Ips 733/2008
Appeal dismissed; court held no contradiction exists when opposing a court's evidentiary assessment of document content.
VSL Sodba II Cp 1334/2018
Appeal dismissed; final judgment binds parties, excluding heirs from inheritance disputes as non-essential co-litigants.
VSK sodba I Cp 1002/2004
Appeal dismissed; gross ingratitude requires severe conduct, not mere legal disputes or inheritance claims.
VSL sodba in sklep
Appeal dismissed; court upheld first instance ruling on inheritance claims and procedural defects.

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]

Ker nobena od vrednosti spornega predmeta (tako po tožbi kot po nasprotni tožbi) ne presega 1.000.000 SIT, revizija ni dovoljena (drugi odstavek 367. člena ZPP).

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je tožencema naložilo, da morata tožnikom vrniti v neposredno posest parc. št. 623/4 in 623/12 obe k.o. ... ter jima prepovedalo nadaljnja poseganja v ti nepremičnini. Zavrnilo je zahtevek iz nasprotne tožbe za ugotovitev, da je darilna pogodba med F. V. kot darovalcem in J. K., F. K. in E. K. z dne 18.8.1978 nična. Toženca je zavezalo, da morata tretji tožnici solidarno povrniti njene stroške postopka v znesku 194.043 SIT z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od izdaje sodbe.

Pritožbeno sodišče je zavrnilo pritožbo tožencev in potrdilo sodbo prve stopnje.

Zoper to sodbo sta toženca vložila revizijo.

Revizija ni dovoljena.

Ker nobena od vrednosti spornega predmeta (tako po tožbi kot po nasprotni tožbi) ne presega 1.000.000 SIT, revizija ni dovoljena (drugi odstavek 367. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku - Uradni list RS, št. 26/99 in nasl. - ZPP). Revizijsko sodišče jo je zato zavrglo (377. člen ZPP).