Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 77/2011 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2011:I.R.77.2011 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction to Kranje court due to parties' residence and health issues.

Case Number Sklep I R 77/2011
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 designated the District Court in Kranje as the competent court for the proceedings. This decision was based on the fact that both the applicant and the participant reside in Kranje, with the participant suffering from severe health conditions. The court ruled that holding the trial in Kranje would facilitate the process more effectively, thereby granting the delegation request.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 37 of the Non-Contentious Procedure Act: The Supreme Court may designate another competent court to handle a case upon request if it is evident that the proceedings will be conducted more easily.

Keywords

AI generated
jurisdiction transfer delegation for convenience party residence health conditions competent court designation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 37 of the Non-Contentious Procedure Act
AI generated
VSRS Sklep I R 31/2026
Supreme Court transfers guardianship proceedings to a court closer to the ward's temporary residence for procedural efficiency.
VSK sklep I Kr 41903/2013
Higher court transfers criminal trial to closer district court due to defendant's health and financial hardship.
Sklep I R 158/2009
Supreme Court transfers capacity proceedings from Jesenice to Kranj based on economic efficiency and parties' locations.
VSL sklep I Kp 1224/97
Appeal granted; first-instance court rejected jurisdiction objection due to unclear municipal boundary data.
VSM sklep Cpg 440/97
Appeal dismissed; execution against bank account requires local court where account is held, not bankruptcy court.

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

Za odločanje v tej zadevi se kot pristojno sodišče določi Okrajno sodišče v Kranju.

[JEDRO]

Bivanje predlagateljice in (bolnega) udeleženca v Kranju predstavljajo razlog za delegacijo zaradi smotrnosti in je zato Vrhovno sodišče določilo pristojnost kranjskega sodišča.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Iz predlogov za delegacijo Okrajnega sodišča na Jesenicah in udeleženca, je med drugim razvidno tudi, da tako predlagateljica kot udeleženec prebivata v K., udeleženec pa ima tudi hude zdravstvene težave in bi se zato postopek očitno lažje opravil na Okrajnem sodišču v Kranju.

2. Predloga sta utemeljena.

3. Vrhovno sodišče lahko na predlog stranke ali pristojnega sodišča določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, da postopa v zadevi, če je očitno, da se bo tako lažje opravil postopek(1). Bivanje predlagateljice in (bolnega) udeleženca v Kranju predstavljajo razlog za delegacijo zaradi smotrnosti in je zato Vrhovno sodišče določilo pristojnost kranjskega sodišča.

---.---

Op. št. (1): Primerjaj 67. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku in 37. člen Zakona o nepravdnem postopku.