Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep I R 143/2020 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2020:I.R.143.2020 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers case to Ptuj District Court due to perceived lack of impartiality from shared hall with plaintiff's lawyer.

Case Number VSRS Sklep I R 143/2020
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 the Maribor District Court's request to transfer a civil case to the Ptuj District Court. The plaintiff's lawyer argued that his wife is the judge at Maribor, while both courts share a hallway and daily interactions occur. The court ruled that these circumstances undermine the appearance of impartiality, justifying the transfer under Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure; The Supreme Court may transfer a case to another competent court if there are other significant reasons, particularly those undermining the appearance of impartiality, such as close personal or professional ties between the parties and the judges.

Keywords

AI generated
transfer of jurisdiction appearance of impartiality Code of Civil Procedure shared office space family relationship judge supreme court decision procedural fairness

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure

Cited Case Law

AI generated
III R 16/2020
Slovenian Supreme Court transfers bankruptcy case to Ljubljana due to conflict of interest between debtor and judge's relatives.
I R 85/2019
Supreme Court transfers enforcement case to another court due to perceived bias from judge's spouse being defendant.
I R 36/2019
Supreme Court transfers enforcement case to another court due to spouse of judge being a party.
I R 37/2019
Supreme Court transfers enforcement case to another district court due to spouse of judge being defendant.
I R 48/2019
Supreme Court orders transfer of case to ensure objective impartiality when judge is spouse of opposing party.
AI generated
Sklep I R 30/2002
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses transfer request where client's relative is retired court employee.
Sklep VIII R 42/2008
Vrhovno sodišče določilo drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče zaradi tožnika sodnika porotnika na naslovnem sodišču.
VSRS Sklep I R 146/2021
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction due to a judge's mother being defendants, ensuring impartiality appearance.
Sklep I R 81/2007
Personal acquaintance with a judge does not justify transferring jurisdiction under ZPP Art. 67.
Sklep I R 40/2001
Supreme Court transfers non-litigation case to nearest court due to judge's employment bias.

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 določi Okrajno sodišče na Ptuju.

[JEDRO]

Po ustaljeni sodni praksi so drugi tehtni razlogi, ki utemeljujejo prenos pristojnosti, predvsem okoliščine, ki bi lahko omajale videz nepristranskosti sodišča - taka je tudi dejstvo o zakonski zvezi med stranko v postopku in sodnikom pristojnega sdoišča. .

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Pred Okrajnim sodiščem v Mariboru je v teku pravdna zadeva I P 441/2020. To sodišče je Vrhovnemu sodišču predlagalo, naj na podlagi 67. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) za odločanje v tej zadevi določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče. V predlogu navaja, da je tožnik zakonec nepravdne sodnice A. A. Dalje navaja, da imajo sodniki nepravdnega in pravdnega sodišča kabinete na istem hodniku in se vsakodnevno srečujejo.

2. Predlog je utemeljen.

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, ali če so za to drugi tehtni razlogi (67. člen ZPP).

4. Po ustaljeni sodni praksi so drugi tehtni razlogi, ki utemeljujejo prenos pristojnosti, predvsem okoliščine, ki bi lahko omajale videz nepristranskosti sodišča.

5. Okoliščina, na katero opira predlog Okrajno sodišče v Mariboru, je po presoji Vrhovnega sodišča prav takšna okoliščina. Takšna je tudi sodna praksa. 1 Ker je tako, je Vrhovno sodišče predlogu za prenos pristojnosti ugodilo ter odločilo, da se za odločanje v tej zadevi določi Okrajno sodišče na Ptuju.

1 Primerjaj npr. odločitve Vrhovnega sodišča v naslednjih zadevah: III R 16/2020, I R 85/2019, I R 36/2019, I R 37/2019, I R 48/2019 ter številne druge.