Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep VIII Ips 3/2012 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2012:VIII.IPS.3.2012 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal due to lack of required signatures making the appeal incomplete under Labor Law.

Case Number Sklep VIII Ips 3/2012
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 appeal because it lacked the mandatory signatures required by law, rendering it incomplete. The appellant had previously lost a labor dispute regarding wrongful termination and attempted to challenge the final judgment via review. The court ruled that without a signed submission by the appellant or their representative, the review procedure cannot proceed, and the lower court's failure to address this defect was not remedied.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

335. člen ZPP; 383. člen ZPP: A review petition is legally incomplete and must be rejected if it lacks either the specific notice of the contested judgment or the signature of the appellant or their authorized representative.

Keywords

AI generated
incomplete appeal labor law review signature requirement procedural defect dismissal of review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
335. člen ZPP
383. člen ZPP
336. člen ZPP
Določbe ZPP o vračanju nepopolnih vlog v dopolnitev se v postopku z revizijo ne uporabljajo (336. člen ZPP v zvezi s 383.
377. člen ZPP
AI generated
Sklep VIII DoR 128/2009-5
Supreme Court dismisses request for leave to appeal when appeal is already statutorily permitted.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 363/2025
Appeal dismissed; probationary work requires employment contract, not civil law agreement.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 421/2017
Appeal dismissed; employer lawfully terminated invalid employee when no suitable alternative work existed.
VDS sodba Pdp 1066/2005
Appeal dismissed; employee's unauthorized annual leave justified termination under labor law.
VDSS Sklep Pdp 58/2023
Appeal allowed; first-instance court violated procedural rules by failing to rule on evidence request in retrial.

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]

V obravnavani zadevi revizije ni podpisal nihče, zato revizija ni popolna.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo primarne in podrejene tožbene zahtevke za ugotovitev nezakonitosti odpovedi pogodbe o zaposlitvi, za reintegracijo in reparacijo. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožeče stranke zavrnilo ter potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje.

2. Tožeča stranka je zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje vložila revizijo.

3. Revizija ni popolna.

4. Iz določbe 335. člena ZPP v zvezi s 383. členom ZPP izhajata minimalni zahtevi, ki jih mora izpolnjevati vsaka revizija, da se sploh lahko obravnava. To sta navedba sodbe, zoper katero se vlaga, in podpis revidenta oziroma njegovega pooblaščenca. Revizija brez katere koli od navedenih sestavin je nepopolna. Določbe ZPP o vračanju nepopolnih vlog v dopolnitev se v postopku z revizijo ne uporabljajo (336. člen ZPP v zvezi s 383. členom ZPP).

5. V obravnavani zadevi revizije ni podpisal nihče, zato revizija ni popolna.

6. Vrhovno sodišče je nepopolno revizijo zavrglo na podlagi 377. člena ZPP, ker tega v mejah svojih pravic ni storilo že sodišče prve stopnje.