Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I Ips 117/96 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1996:I.IPS.117.96 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses request for legality protection by victim's representative as victim lacks standing under Criminal Procedure Act.

Case Number Sklep I Ips 117/96
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 dismissed the request for legality protection filed by the victim's representative against a final court decision. The victim, I.O.J., was not present at the trial, and her representative sought restoration of the pre-trial status due to alleged procedural violations. The court ruled that only the state prosecutor, the convicted person, or their legal representatives may file such requests, explicitly excluding victims from this right under Article 421 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 421 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act; Article 423 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act: A request for legality protection may only be filed by the state prosecutor, the convicted person, or their legal representatives; victims do not have standing to file such requests.

Keywords

AI generated
victim standing legality protection criminal procedure act procedural review legal representative supreme court procedural rights

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 421 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act
Article 423 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act
Article 367 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act
AI generated
Sodba I Ips 105/2010
Supreme Court dismisses appeal against conviction for extortion, upholding joint liability and evidence rejection.
Sklep II Ips 81/93
Appeal dismissed; failure to notify counsel of judgment is not a valid excuse for missing appeal deadline.
Sklep in sodba II Ips 585/92
Service on a legal entity is valid if all employees are at the delivery address, even if the registered seat differs.
Sklep I Up 150/2012
Appeal dismissed; no special rules for asylum applicants vs. counsel regarding appeal deadline extensions exist. No special rules for asylum applicants vs. counsel regarding appeal deadline extensions exist.
VSRS Sodba I Ips 11688/2017
Supreme Court partially allows appeal, quashing murder attempt verdict due to improper change of charges violating defense rights.

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

Zahteva za varstvo zakonitosti pooblaščenca oškodovane I.O.J. se zavrže kot nedovoljena.

[JEDRO]

Iz določbe 1. odst. 421. čl. ZKP sledi, da oškodovanec ne sodi v krog oseb, ki imajo pravico vložiti zahtevo za varstvo zakonitosti.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Okrajno sodišče v N. je s sodbo z dne 18.12.1995, na podlagi 1. točke 357. člena ZKP zavrnilo obtožni predlog (pravilno obtožbo) zoper obdolženega P.P. zaradi kaznivega dejanja ogrožanja javnega prometa po 1. in 3. odstavku 251. člena KZ-77. Pooblaščenec oškodovane I.O.J. (ki nista bila navzoča na glavni obravnavi) je zoper sodbo vložil pritožbo in hkrati prosil, da se dovoli oškodovanki vrnitev v prejšnje stanje. Prošnjo pooblaščenca je okrajno sodišče zavrnilo, prav tako je pritožbeno sodišče zavrnilo pritožbo zoper takšno odločitev s sklepoma, navedenima v uvodu. Zoper ti dve pravnomočni odločbi in zoper sodni postopek, ki je tekel pred njima, je pooblaščenec oškodovane I.O.J vložil zahtevo za varstvo zakonitosti zaradi kršitve določb kazenskega postopka in predlagal razveljavitev napadenih sklepov.

Po določbi 1. odstavka 421. člena ZKP smejo zahtevo za varstvo zakonitosti vložiti Državni tožilec RS, obsojenec in zagovornik, po obsojenčevi smrti pa osebe iz 2. odstavka 367. člena ZKP. Iz navedene določbe sledi, da oškodovanec ne sodi v krog oseb, ki imajo pravico vložiti zahtevo za varstvo zakonitosti. Na podlagi ugotovitve, da zahteva za varstvo zakonitosti, ki jo je vložil pooblaščenec oškodovanke, ni dovoljena, jo je vrhovno sodišče v skladu z določilom 2. odstavka 423. člena ZKP zavrglo.