Appeal dismissed because the disputed amount of 22,707.73 SIT fell below the 80,000 SIT threshold for review under ZPP. The court rejected the appeal as inadmissible due to the insufficient value of the subject matter. The decision clarifies that the disputed sum, not interest, determines review eligibility under Article 382 of the Civil Procedure Act. The court ruled that the appeal was not allowed because the monetary threshold for initiating a review was not met. The judgment emphasizes strict adherence to the statutory limits for appellate review in civil cases. The outcome confirms that appeals below the specified monetary limit are automatically inadmissible. The ruling reinforces the importance of the disputed amount in determining the admissibility of civil appeals. The decision serves as a precedent for calculating review thresholds based on the principal disputed sum. The court's reasoning highlights the exclusion of interest calculations when assessing the value of the subject matter for review purposes. The final ruling ensures that only cases exceeding the statutory monetary limit can proceed to the review court.
Slovenia (SI)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe review was rejected because the disputed amount of 22,707.73 SIT fell below the statutory threshold for admissibility. The first-instance court ordered payment of this sum, which the second-instance court confirmed after dismissing the defendant's and intervenor's complaints. The review court held that the appeal was inadmissible because the disputed value did not exceed the 80,000 SIT limit required by Article 382 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArticle 382, paragraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 35, paragraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act: An appeal is inadmissible if the disputed amount in the final judgment does not exceed the statutory threshold, which is determined by the principal sum of the disputed subject matter excluding interest.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedFull text
Revizija se zavrže.
[JEDRO]
Tožba je bila vložena 25.3.1993. Izpodbijani del pravnomočne sodbe znaša 22.707,73 SIT, kar je po veljavnem 2. odst. 382. čl. ZPP (Ur. l. RS 55/92) premalo, da bi bila revizija dovoljena.
[OBRAZLOŽITEV]
Sodišče prve stopnje je deloma ugodilo tožbenemu zahtevku in toženi stranki naložilo plačilo 22.707,73 SIT z zakonitimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 25.3.1993 dalje. Sodišče druge stopnje je sodbo sodišča prve stopnje potrdilo, potem ko je zavrnilo pritožbi tožene stranke in stranskega intervenienta.
Proti sodbi sodišča druge stopnje vlaga stranski intevenient zaradi zmotne uporabe materialnega prava pravočasno revizijo. Revizijskemu sodišču predlaga, da reviziji ugodi in sodbi sodišč druge in prve stopnje razveljavi ter zadevi vrne v ponovno odločanje prvostopenjskemu sodišču.
Revizija ni dovoljena.
Toženi stranki je naloženo plačilo 22.707,73 SIT (z zakonitimi zamudnimi obrestmi, ki tečejo od 25.3.1993 dalje - te za presojo dovoljenosti revizije niso pomembne, 2. odst. 35. čl. ZPP). Ta znesek v konkretnem primeru predstavlja vrednost spornega predmeta izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe, ki je odločilna za presojo dovoljenosti revizije po 2. odst. 382. čl. ZPP. Z 2. odst. 382. čl. je kot mejna vrednost spornega predmeta, od katere je odvisna dovoljenost revizije v konkretnem primeru (tožba je bila vložena 25.3.1993), predpisana vrednost v znesku, ki presega 80.000,00 SIT (Zakon o valorizaciji denarnih kazni za kazniva dejanja in gospodarske prestopke ter drugih denarnih zneskov, Ur.l. RS 55/92). Ta znesek pa glede na povedano presega znesek, ki je v tem revizijskem postopku lahko sporen in ki znaša, kot je bilo že zapisano 22.707,73 SIT. Glede na navedeno je revizijsko sodišče odločilo, kot je razvidno iz izreka sklepa (392. čl. ZPP).