Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 859/93 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1993:II.IPS.859.93 AI generated

Supreme Court allows withdrawal of appeal when court has not yet ruled on it.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 859/93
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 accepted the withdrawal of an appeal filed by the appellant. The appellant had previously lost at the first instance and second instance levels before submitting a withdrawal request after the second instance court confirmed the lower court's decision. Since the appellate court had not yet issued a ruling on the appeal when the withdrawal was submitted, the court formally acknowledged the withdrawal without requiring the opposing party's consent.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

According to Article 349(2) of the Civil Procedure Act; the withdrawal of an appeal is effective immediately upon receipt by the court if the court has not yet made a decision on the appeal, and the opposing party's consent is not required.

Keywords

AI generated
withdrawal of appeal civil procedure law appellate court decision effective date of withdrawal opposing party consent

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 349(2) of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 399 of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 158(2) of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
Sklep II Ips 687/2004
Appeal dismissed because lawyer failed to submit new power of attorney within court-ordered deadline.
VSL sklep I Cpg 624/2010
Court rejects triple damages for fish loss, ruling it exceeds statutory compensation limits.
VSL sodba I Cpg 407/2016
Appeal dismissed; State Review Commission not liable for unclaimed procedural violations affecting tender award.
VSK Sodba I Cp 246/2017
Appeal dismissed; court found no causal link between dental procedure and sinus issues, upholding first-instance judgment.
VSL Vmesna sodba II Cp 1546/2021
Appeal court allows claim for damages from dangerous activity due to objective liability and causation.

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

Umik revizije se vzame na znanje.

[JEDRO]

Če stranka umakne revizijo, revizijsko sodišče pa o njej še ni odločilo, revizijsko sodišče umik le vzame na znanje.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek tožeče stranke. Pritožbeno sodišče je zavrnilo pritožbo tožeče stranke in prvostopno sodbo potrdilo.

Proti drugostopni sodbi je tožeča stranka dne 1.10.1993 vložila revizijo.

Tožeča stranka je nato z vlogo, ki jo je poslala sodišču dne 10.12.1993, revizijo umaknila.

Po 2. odstavku 349. člena ZPP, ki se uporablja tudi v revizijskem postopku (399. člen), lahko stranka, dokler sodišče ne izda odločbe, umakne pravno sredstvo. Izjava o umiku učinkuje takoj, ko jo sodišče prejme. Privolitev nasprotne stranke ni potrebna.

O reviziji tožeče stranke revizijsko sodišče do dneva prejema umika dne 15.12.1993 še ni odločilo. Zato je izdalo samo sklep, s katerim je umik revizije vzelo na znanje.

Ker toženi stranki z umikom revizije niso nastali nobeni stroški (odgovora ni vložila), revizijsko sodišče tudi ni odločalo o njenih stroških revizijskega postopka (2. odstavek 158. člena ZPP).