Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III Ips 17/94 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1994:III.IPS.17.94 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because the dispute value of 1,600 SIT did not meet the 45,000 SIT threshold for review under the Civil Procedure Act.

Case Number Sklep III Ips 17/94
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 rejected the appeal filed by the tenant against the eviction order. The tenant argued for the annulment of both lower court decisions, claiming the rent was indeterminate and that the new law could not be applied retroactively. The court dismissed the appeal because the disputed value of 1,600 SIT fell significantly below the 45,000 SIT threshold required for a review to be admissible under the Civil Procedure Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

6th paragraph of the Law on Amendments to the Civil Procedure Act; 392nd paragraph of the Civil Procedure Act: An appeal is inadmissible if the value of the disputed subject matter at the time the proceedings commenced does not meet the statutory threshold for review.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act appeal admissibility dispute value threshold retroactive application eviction proceedings tenant rights review rejection

Cited Legislation

AI generated
6th paragraph of the Law on Amendments to the Civil Procedure Act (Ur. l. SFRJ št. 20/90)
392nd paragraph of the Civil Procedure Act (ZPP)
390th paragraph of the Civil Procedure Act (ZPP)
AI generated
VSL sklep Cpg 1477/95
Appeal allowed; sale contract validity is a preliminary issue for eviction claim under ZPP s. 12.1.
VSL sodba I Cpg 150/99
Appeal dismissed because plaintiff failed to specify facts to be proven by witness examination request.
VSL sodba II Cp 2062/93
Appeal dismissed; breach of contract deadline bars reliance on changed circumstances for contract rescission.
VSL Sodba in sklep II Cp 1571/2019
Appeal partially allowed; vague 'all accessories' eviction claim dismissed due to lack of specificity.
VSL sodba I Cpg 25/2000
Appeal dismissed; court confirms eviction order against both tenant and owner based on business premises misuse.

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 zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Vrednost spora 1.600,00 SIT v času, ko se je začel ta postopek, ni dosegla nujne vrednosti za dovoljenost revizije 45.000,00 SIT po noveli ZPP (Ur. l. SFRJ 20/90).

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je razsodilo, da ostane v veljavi izpraznitveni nalog Temeljnega sodišča v ..., opr.št. N ../92 z dne 27.3.1992 za poslovni prostor.

Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrnilo pritožbo tožene stranke in potrdilo sodbo prve stopnje.

Proti tej sodbi vlaga tožena stranka revizijo. Uveljavlja revizijski razlog zmotne uporabe materialnega prava in predlaga, da revizijsko sodišče obe sodbi razveljavi in vrne zadevo sodišču prve stopnje v novo sojenje. Zatrjuje, da najemnina ni določljiva in se sklicuje na prepoved retroaktivne uporabe zakona.

Tožeča stranka na revizijo ni odgovorila in Javni tožilec Republike Slovenije se o njej ni izjavil ( 3. odst. 390.čl. ZPP).

Revizija ni dovoljena.

Tožeča stranka je navedla vrednost spornega predmeta 1.600,00 Sit. Po noveli zakona o pravdnem postopku Ur.l. SFRJ št. 20/90, ki je veljala v času, ko se je začel ta postopek, je znašala mejna vrednost spornega predmeta v gospodarskih sporih, nad katero je bila dovoljena revizija, 45.000,00 Sit (6.čl. zakona o spremembah zakona o pravdnem postopku Ur.l. SFRJ št. 20/90 v zvezi s 497.čl. ZPP). Glede na vrednost spora 1.600,00 Sit navedeni pogoj za dovoljenost revizije ni izpolnjen.

Odločitev revizijskega sodišča temelji na 392.čl. ZPP.