Legislator Case Law & Legislation
Sodba II Ips 951/2006 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2008:II.IPS.951.2006 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal upholding buyer's title over seller's defective ownership in enforcement proceedings.

Case Number Sodba II Ips 951/2006
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia dismissed the appellant's appeal, confirming the lower courts' decision that the enforcement buyer acquired original ownership rights. The appellant, a co-owner, argued that the court erred in allowing a sale by a non-disposing co-owner and failed to provide clear reasoning. The court ruled that the enforcement sale was legally effective because the buyer acted in good faith and the land registry's protection of bona fide acquisition takes precedence over the co-owner's lack of disposal capacity.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 42 of the Property Act; Article 10 of the Property Act; Article 8 of the Land Register Act: Original ownership is acquired by a buyer in enforcement proceedings if the buyer acts in good faith, and the protection of bona fide acquisition in the land registry prevails over the seller's lack of disposal capacity.

Keywords

AI generated
enforcement proceedings original ownership acquisition lack of disposal capacity bona fide acquisition land registry protection co-owner rights property law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 42 of the Property Act
Article 10 of the Property Act
Article 8 of the Land Register Act
Article 14, paragraph 2, point 2 of Section 339 of the Act on Civil Procedure
Article 165, paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure
Article 154, paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure

Cited Case Law

AI generated
Case II Ips 505/2003
AI generated

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 zavrne.

Tožeča stranka mora toženi stranki v 15 dneh povrniti 465,18 EUR stroškov odgovora na revizijo z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi, ki tečejo od 16. dne od vročitve te sodbe.

[JEDRO]

Tožeča stranka je sicer lastniški posestnik spornega stanovanja, na njem pa zaradi pomanjkanja razpolagalne sposobnosti prodajalcev ni mogla pridobiti lastninske pravice, zato je treba dati prednost toženi stranki – kupcu stanovanja v izvršilnem postopku, ki je na njem izvirno pridobila lastninsko pravico.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]