Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III DoR 70/2011 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2011:III.DOR.70.2011 AI generated

Supreme Court allows appeal regarding new contract law amendment's impact on contractual terms.

Case Number Sklep III DoR 70/2011
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 granted permission for an appeal focusing on the impact of a new contract law amendment on the parties' agreement. The appellant failed to secure payment of a commission for supplementary health insurance at both lower court levels. The court permitted the review because the specific legal question regarding the new law's effect on the contract met the statutory requirements for appellate review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure; Article 367a paragraph 3 of the Act on Civil Procedure: An appeal is admissible when the lower court's decision concerns a legal question that is not fully resolved by existing case law and is of significant importance for the application of the law.

Keywords

AI generated
contract law amendment supreme court appeal admissibility criteria contractual terms health insurance commission

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure
Article 367a paragraph 3 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated
VDSS sodba Psp 330/2014
Appeal dismissed; employer correctly included employee in mandatory health insurance under self-pay provision due to lack of social assistance approval.
Sklep III DoR 43/2013
Supreme Court allows review regarding whether new health law invalidates commission clauses over 0.75%.
VDSS sodba Psp 129/2010
Appeal dismissed; claimant denied reimbursement for private medical care abroad based on Austrian insurer's lower reimbursement rate.
VDS sklep Psp 123/98
Appeal allowed; social court must decide merits unless prior administrative facts were flawed or fact-finding was excessively costly.
Sklep III Ips 109/2009
Supreme Court allows appeal, voids lower rulings, and remands case regarding joint liability of vehicle owners in traffic accidents under ZOR.

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 dopusti glede vprašanja vpliva novele k ZZVZZ z določbo 62.d člena na pogodbeno ureditev pravdnih strank.

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja iz izreka odločbe.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Tožeča stranka na prvi in drugi stopnji ni uspela s tožbenim zahtevkom, s katerim je zahtevala plačilo provizije v zvezi z izvajanjem dopolnilnega zdravstvenega zavarovanja.

2. Predlog za dopustitev revizije z večimi (tudi implicitno zastavljenimi) vprašanji.

3. Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku so izpolnjeni glede pravnega vprašanja, opredeljenega v izreku tega sklepa. Vrhovno sodišče je zato revizijo v obsegu, začrtanem z navedenim vprašanjem, dopustilo.