Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 27/2016 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2016:II.DOR.27.2016 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal request as claim value under 2,000 EUR threshold per individual plaintiff.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 27/2016
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 defendant's request to allow an appeal against the final judgment. The court determined that the disputed amount for each individual plaintiff did not exceed the 2,000 EUR threshold required for appellate review under the Code of Civil Procedure. Consequently, the request for permission to appeal was deemed inadmissible because the financial value of the contested portion of the judgment fell below the statutory limit for any single claimant.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Fourth paragraph of Article 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure; An appeal request is inadmissible if the value of the contested part of the final judgment does not exceed 2,000 EUR for each individual plaintiff in cases of subjective cumulation of claims.

Keywords

AI generated
Code of Civil Procedure appeal permission value threshold subjective cumulation individual plaintiff final judgment inadmissible request

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367, paragraph 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPP)

Cited Case Law

AI generated
II Ips 159/2014
Supreme Court dismisses appeal as review threshold not met for any individual heir regarding property rights or bond claims.
II Ips 164/2015
Appeal dismissed; separate legal relationships between multiple plaintiffs and defendants preclude joint value aggregation for appeal threshold.
AI generated
VSL sodba II Cp 1357/2000
Appeal partially allowed; court awards additional lost earnings damages for sole proprietorship injury while rejecting business loss claims due to lack of causal link.
VSL sodba in sklep II Cp 913/2016
Court allows third-party tort claim against co-owners of a vehicle where one is not fully liable for the damage.
VSL sodba in sklep II Cp 2042/99
Court partially allows claim for pre-judgment interest by ruling creditor must accept partial debt performance.
Sodba III Ips 73/93
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on procedural defects and substantive errors regarding corporate continuity and administrative liability.
VSC Sklep Cp 514/2018
Appeal allowed; default judgment revoked due to failure to request trial scheduling. Default judgment revoked because defendant failed to request trial scheduling.

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]

Vrhovno sodišče ne more dopustiti revizije,če vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe ne presega 2.000,00 EUR (četrti odstavek 367. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku - ZPP). Tožniki niso enotni sosporniki, v primeru subjektivne kumulacije tožbenih zahtevkov pa mora načeloma vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe presegati prag 2.000,00 EUR glede vsakega posameznega tožnika (v razmerju do toženke). S predlogom izpodbijani del pravnomočne sodbe za nobenega od tožnikov ne presega navedenega praga in zato predlog za dopustitev revizije ni dovoljen.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. S pravnomočno sodbo pritožbenega sodišča je tožena stranka zavezana, da plača prvo in drugo tožeči stranki solidarno znesek 1.399,61 EUR v zvezi z znižanjem kupnine in premoženjsko škodo, ter vsakemu po 150,00 EUR odškodnine za nepremoženjsko škodo. Tretje tožeči stranki je sodišče prisodilo 400,00 EUR, četrto tožeči stranki pa 300,00 EUR odškodnine za nepremoženjsko škodo.

2. Tožena stranka je vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije proti sodbi pritožbenega sodišča, kolikor se nanaša na ugoditev tožbenim zahtevkom.

3. Predlog ni dovoljen.

4. Vrhovno sodišče ne more dopustiti revizije,če vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe ne presega 2.000,00 EUR (četrti odstavek 367. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku - ZPP). Tožniki niso enotni sosporniki, v primeru subjektivne kumulacije tožbenih zahtevkov pa mora načeloma vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe presegati prag 2.000,00 EUR glede vsakega posameznega tožnika (v razmerju do toženke).(1) S predlogom izpodbijani del pravnomočne sodbe za nobenega od tožnikov ne presega navedenega praga in zato predlog za dopustitev revizije ni dovoljen.

----

(1) Primerjaj odločbi VS RS II Ips 159/2014 z dne 10. 12. 2015 in VS RS II Ips 164/2015 z dne 21. 1. 2016.