Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II DoR 373/2010 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2010:II.DOR.373.2010 AI generated

Appeal against dismissal of appeal is admissible by law, making a request for permission to appeal inadmissible.

Case Number Sklep II DoR 373/2010
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court dismissed the applicant's request for permission to appeal the second-instance court's decision rejecting the appellant's complaint. The second-instance court had rejected the appeal because the appellant's representative submitted an insufficient and therefore non-considered power of attorney. The court ruled that since the law already permits an appeal against the second-instance court's decision to reject an appeal, a separate request for permission to appeal is legally inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 384(3) ZPP; Art. 377 ZPP: Since an appeal against a second-instance court's decision rejecting an appeal is admissible by law, a request for permission to appeal such a decision is inadmissible.

Keywords

AI generated
permission to appeal second instance court rejection of appeal admissibility of appeal power of attorney ZPP appeal provisions inadmissible request

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 384(3) ZPP
Art. 377 ZPP

Cited Case Law

AI generated
Sklep II DoR 47/2009 z dne 10. 9. 2009
sklep II DoR 47/2009 z dne 10. 9. 2009.
AI generated
VSL sklep I Cp 1256/99
Appeal dismissed because the appeal failed to identify the specific judgment, violating mandatory appeal requirements under ZPP.
VSK sklep I Cp 657/2015
Appeal granted; lower court must request proof of qualification when advocate claims to have passed the state bar exam.
VDSS sklep Psp 454/2013
Appeal dismissed because the lawyer failed to attach a power of attorney to the appeal document.
VSRS Sklep I Up 50/2021
Appeal dismissed because appellant failed to prove legal qualification required for filing administrative appeals.
VSRS Sklep I Up 81/2021
Supreme Court dismisses appeal lodged by a non-lawyer due to lack of legal qualification and prior rejection.

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

Predlog se zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Ker je revizija zoper sklep sodišča druge stopnje o zavrženje pritožbe dovoljena že po samem zakonu, predlog za dopustitev revizije ni dovoljen.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrglo drugotoženčevo pritožbo zoper sodbo sodišča prve stopnje. Zavzelo je stališče, da je pritožnikov pooblaščenec predložil pomanjkljivo in zato neupoštevno pooblastilo za zastopanje.

2. Drugi toženec v predlogu za dopustitev revizije izpodbija pravilnost navedenega stališča.

3. Predlog ni dovoljen.

4. Tudi po uveljavitvi Zakona o spremembah in dopolnitvah zakona o pravdnem postopku (Uradni list RS, št. 45/08), ki je uveljavil institut dopuščene revizije, je revizija zoper sklep, s katerim je sodišče druge stopnje zavrglo vloženo pritožbo, vselej dovoljena (tretji odstavek 384. člena ZPP). Ker je torej revizija zoper izpodbijani sklep dovoljena že po samem zakonu, predlog za dopustitev revizije ni dovoljen.(1)

5. Po navedenem je Vrhovno sodišče predlog zavrglo (377. člen ZPP).

---.---

Op. št. (1): Prim. sklep II DoR 47/2009 z dne 10. 9. 2009.