Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III DoR 96/2010 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2011:III.DOR.96.2010 AI generated

Court allows appeal regarding damages for bad faith negotiations under Section 20 of the Obligations Act.

Case Number Sklep III DoR 96/2010
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court granted the applicant's request to permit an appeal against the second-instance judgment confirming liability for damages. The lower courts had ordered the respondent to pay approximately 34,244 EUR in costs incurred by the applicant for project preparation and administrative procedures related to obtaining a building permit. The court determined that these specific costs constituted valid damages resulting from the respondent's bad faith negotiations under Section 20 of the Obligations Act, thereby satisfying the legal requirements for the appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 20 of the Obligations Act; Section 367.a Paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act: Damages for bad faith negotiations include reasonable costs incurred by the aggrieved party for necessary preparatory work and administrative procedures directly linked to the failed negotiation process.

Keywords

AI generated
bad faith negotiations damages for breach Obligations Act project preparation costs building permit procedures appeal permission negotiation liability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 20 of the Obligations Act
Section 367.a Paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
VSC Sodba Cpg 104/2020
Court dismisses appeal upholding liability for breach of contract negotiation under OZ Art. 20(3).
VDSS Sodba Pdp 222/2023
Employment court dismisses claim for breach of non-compete penalty due to lack of specific proprietary knowledge evidence.
VSC Sklep I Cp 213/2023
Appeal partially allowed; expert dismissal rejected as single-party presence doesn't prove bias.
VSL Sklep II Cp 1038/2017
Appeal dismissed: Subsequent revocation of primary claim does not justify reopening proceedings for secondary claim.
VDSS sklep Pdp 1074/2015
Appeal allowed: Court of Appeal reversed first instance judgment on contractual penalty for breach of non-compete clause.

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

Predlogu se ugodi, revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja:

Ali je stroške, nastale z izdelavo projektov in vodenjem upravnih postopkov za pridobitev gradbenega dovoljenja, v okoliščinah konkretnega primera (glede na dopis tožene stranke, v katerem je tožečo stranko obvestila o izbiri in o tem, da sledi oblikovanje in sklenitev pogodbe ter da lahko kot izbrani ponudnik opravlja potrebna dela v zvezi s postopki pridobivanja gradbenega dovoljenja) mogoče priznati kot škodo zaradi nepoštenih pogajanj po 3. odstavku 20. člena OZ?

[JEDRO]

Predlogu se ugodi gled vprašanja, navedenega v izreku odločbe.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Tožena stranka je vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje, s katero je bila potrjena sodba sodišča prve stopnje, ki je toženi stranki naložila plačilo 34.244,09 EUR iz naslova odškodnine za škodo zaradi neutemeljene opustitve pogajanj s strani tožene stranke (20. člen OZ). Tako nastala škoda so po presoji sodišč prve in druge stopnje stroški tožeče stranke, nastali z izdelavo projektov in vodenjem upravnih postopkov za pridobitev gradbenega dovoljenja.

2. V predlogu za dopustitev revizije tožena stranka kot pravno pomembno izpostavlja vprašanje odgovornosti zaradi nepoštenih pogajanj ter za katero škodo naj odgovarja stranka, ki se je nepošteno pogajala.

3. Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena ZPP so v obravnavanem primeru podani glede pravnega vprašanja, opredeljenega v izreku sklepa.