Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep II DoR 341/2020 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2020:II.DOR.341.2020 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal for leave of review regarding compensation for reduced life activity and procedural costs.

Case Number VSRS Sklep II DoR 341/2020
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court rejected the defendant's application for leave of review against the second-instance judgment. The lower courts had awarded partial damages for reduced life activity and adjusted procedural costs, while the defendant argued the compensation was insufficient and the reasoning violated procedural law. The court found no grounds for review as the first-instance decision did not violate the law in a manner requiring Supreme Court intervention.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku 367.a odst. 1; 367.c: The Supreme Court will not grant leave of review if the first-instance judgment does not violate the law in a manner requiring intervention.

Keywords

AI generated
leave of review reduced life activity compensation damages procedural costs ZPP review criteria

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a odst. 1 ZPP
367.c ZPP
154. odst. 1 ZPP
165. odst. 1 ZPP

Cited Case Law

AI generated
II DoR 145/2011
Supreme Court dismisses review application where first instance court correctly assessed non-pecuniary damages and contributory negligence.
II Ips 380/2009
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on pain and suffering damages, upholding individualized and objective compensation principles.
II Ips 883/2008
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on personal injury damages for neck fracture, upholding lower court's fair compensation.
II Ips 484/2008
School liability dismissed for student injury during break due to teacher's negligent absence from duty area.
II Ips 317/2008
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on unjust enrichment damages for future pain and fear, upholding lower court's assessment.
II Ips 304/2007
Appeal dismissed; Supreme Court upheld lower court's non-pecuniary damages assessment under Slovenian law.
II Ips 992/2006
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on non-property damage compensation, upholding lower courts' assessment of pain and suffering.
II Ips 729/2005
Supreme Court partially allows appeal on non-pecuniary damages but dismisses pecuniary damages claim due to value threshold.
AI generated
VSRS Sklep II DoR 215/2022
Supreme Court dismisses appeal application for inadmissibility due to lack of specific legal questions and case file numbers.
VSL sodba I Cpg 1267/2012
Appeal partially allowed; court reduced lawyer fees claim to postal service maximum rate due to lack of itemization.
VSL Sodba I Cp 1987/2019
Appeal dismissed; court held contract content judged objectively, not by declarant's subjective intent.
VSL sklep I Cp 1309/2010
Appeal allowed; unjust enrichment claim accrues only upon transfer of benefit, not at filing.
VSL Sodba I Cpg 1095/2016
Consumer's right to rescind contract satisfied if seller receives notice within deadline; seller's repair attempt does not start one-year limitation clock.

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 zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Predlog se zavrne.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je razsodilo, da je toženka dolžna plačati tožniku še znesek 12.465,00 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 30. 6. 2011 dalje do plačila (1. točka izreka). V presežku za še zahtevanih 4.535,00 EUR pa je višji tožbeni zahtevek zavrnilo (2. točka izreka). Odločilo je tudi o pravdnih stroških (3. do 7. točka izreka).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je toženkino pritožbo zavrnilo in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje v 1. in 2. točki izreka, tožnikovi pritožbi pa je ugodilo in sodbo sodišča prve stopnje v 3. točki izreka spremenilo glede stroškov postopka. Glede stroškov pritožbenega postopka je odločilo, da toženka krije sama svoje, mora pa povrniti tožniku njegove, v primeru zamude z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi.

3. Predlog za dopustitev revizije zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje vlaga toženka. Predlaga dopustitev revizije zaradi odločitve o pomembnih pravnih vprašanjih: 1) Ali je bila v konkretnem primeru tožniku prisojena primerna odškodnina iz naslova zmanjšanja življenjske aktivnosti? 2) Ali obrazložitev sodišča predstavlja izpolnjeno vsebino kršitve po 14. točki drugega odstavka 339. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP)? V zvezi s tem se sklicuje na odločbe Vrhovnega sodišča II DoR 145/2011, II Ips 380/2009, II Ips 883/2008, II Ips 484/2008, II Ips 317/2008, II Ips 304/2007, II Ips 992/2006 in II Ips 729/2005.

4. Predlog ni utemeljen.

5. Vrhovno sodišče je ugotovilo, da glede vprašanj, izpostavljenih v toženkinem predlogu, niso podani pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena ZPP. Zato je njen predlog zavrnilo (367.c člen ZPP). Toženka, ki s predlogom ni uspela, sama krije svoje stroške postopka za dopustitev revizije (prvi odstavek 154. člena ZPP v zvezi s prvim odstavkom 165. člena ZPP).