Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 573/2007 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2010:II.IPS.573.2007 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because individual debt shares under joint liability do not exceed the statutory review threshold.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 573/2007
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 defendant's appeal, ruling that the review threshold was not met. Although the total debt exceeded the limit, the court determined the obligation was divisible among the two plaintiffs rather than joint and several. Consequently, each plaintiff's share fell below the required monetary threshold for a review to be permitted.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

ZPP 367. člen 2. odstavek; ZPP 41. člen 2. odstavek: In property disputes, a review is permitted only if the value of the challenged part of the final judgment exceeds the statutory threshold; when a judgment imposes a divisible obligation without specifying joint and several liability, the threshold is calculated based on the individual share of each creditor.

Keywords

AI generated
review threshold divisible obligation joint and several liability property dispute supreme court review individual share calculation ZPP review provisions

Cited Legislation

AI generated
ZPP 367. člen 2. odstavek
ZPP 41. člen 2. odstavek
ZPP 377. člen
ZPP 154. člen 1. odstavek

Cited Case Law

AI generated
II Ips 574/2007
Appeal dismissed because joint liability was not explicitly claimed, making the claim divisible and below the threshold.
II Ips 540/2008
Appeal dismissed because joint debt was not claimed, making individual claims too small for review threshold.
II Ips 154/2008
Appeal dismissed because individual creditor claim value under threshold prevents review allowance under ZPP.
II Ips 195/2008
Appeal dismissed as individual claim values under threshold due to equal inheritance shares among plaintiffs.
AI generated
Sodba II Ips 789/2007
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on tort damages for non-pecuniary loss, upholding lower courts' valuation of pain and suffering.
Sklep II Ips 284/2007
Appeal dismissed because joint liability not claimed, making individual shares under threshold for review.
Sodba II Ips 347/99
Appeal dismissed; direct evidence of agreement prevails over indirect expert opinion on price reduction. Court rejects new error claims in appeal. Appeal dismissed; direct evidence of agreement prevails over indirect expert opinion on price reduction. Court rejects new error claims in appeal.
VSL Sklep I Cp 2800/2017
Appeal granted; first-instance judgment reversed due to failure to clarify burden of proof on defendant.
VSL sodba II Cp 2523/2013
Appeal dismissed; damages for mental suffering require both objective and subjective criteria assessment.

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 je toženka na podlagi izpodbijane sodbe dolžna vsakemu od tožnikov plačati znesek, ki ne presega razveljavljenega praga, njena revizija ni dovoljena.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je odločilo, da je toženka dolžna tožnikoma plačati znesek 1.931.631,72 SIT z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od zapadlosti posameznih zneskov do plačila. Višji tožbeni zahtevek je zavrnilo. Toženki je naložilo, naj tožnikoma povrne del stroškov postopka, sorazmeren njunemu uspehu v pravdi.

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je toženkino pritožbo zavrnilo in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje.

3. Toženka v reviziji uveljavlja razlog bistvenih kršitev določb postopka.

4. Sodišče je reviziji vročilo Vrhovnemu državnemu tožilstvu Republike Slovenije in tožnikoma, ki nanjo nista odgovorila.

5. Revizija ni dovoljena.

6. V skladu z drugim odstavkom 367. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) je revizija v premoženjskih sporih dovoljena, če vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe presega 4.172,93 EUR (prej 1.000.000 SIT). Če imajo zahtevki v tožbi različno podlago, se vrednost spornega predmeta določi po vrednosti vsakega posameznega zahtevka (drugi odstavek 41. člena ZPP).

7. Toženka je na podlagi izpodbijane sodbe dolžna tožnikoma plačati 1.931.631,72 SIT. Ker se solidarnost ne domneva, v izreku izpodbijane sodbe pa ni določena, gre za deljivo obveznost.(1) To pomeni, da je toženka vsakemu od tožnikov dolžna plačati 965.815,85 SIT. Ker izpodbijani znesek ne presega revizijskega praga, revizija ni dovoljena.

8. Po navedenem je revizijsko sodišče revizijo zavrglo (377. člen ZPP). Odločitev o reviziji vključuje zavrnitev toženkinega predloga za povrnitev stroškov revizijskega postopka (prvi odstavek 154. člena ZPP).

---.---

Op. št. (1): Prim. npr. sklepe II Ips 574/2007, II Ips 540/2008, II Ips 154/2008, II Ips 195/2008.