Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 13/95 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1995:I.R.13.95 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers case to another court due to judge familiarity and procedural efficiency under ZPP Art. 68.

Case Number Sklep I R 13/95
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia transferred the case to the District Court in Vrhnika upon the plaintiff's request. The plaintiff, a president of a higher court, argued that the original court lacked impartiality because the appellate judge knew the first-instance judges. The court accepted this as a valid reason under Article 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure to ensure procedural efficiency.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure; The Supreme Court may transfer a case to another competent court within its jurisdiction if there are significant reasons, such as the familiarity of the appellate judge with the first-instance judges.

Keywords

AI generated
Code of Civil Procedure transfer of jurisdiction significant reasons judge familiarity procedural efficiency Supreme Court competent court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
Sklep I R 110/2005
Court allows transfer of case due to conflict of interest when plaintiff presides over the court.
Sklep I R 20/2002
Appeal dismissed because a judge's temporary assignment does not require transferring jurisdiction to another court.
Sklep I Pr 9/93
Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another competent court due to judge's location.
Sklep I R 8/2001
Supreme Court delegates jurisdiction to another court because the plaintiff was a former president of the original court.
Sklep I R 110/2006
Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court due to employee's employment there affecting public perception of neutrality.

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

Za odločanje v tej pravdni zadevi se določi Okrajno sodišče na Vrhniki.

[JEDRO]

Funkcija sodnika sodišča, ki bi v tej zadevi sodil na pritožbeni stopnji, in ki dobro pozna vse sodnike na območju sodišča, ki naj bi sodilo na prvi stopnji, je tehten razlog za postopanje po navedeni določbi ZPP.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožeča stranka je vložila tožbo pri krajevno pristojnem sodišču Okrajnem sodišču v ... Tožeča stranka je predsednik Višjega sodišča v ... Zato je predlagala, da naj Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije na podlagi 68. člena ZPP (Zakona o pravdnem postopku) za sojenje v tej zadevi določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče. Ta predlog je nato Okrajno sodišče v ... posredovalo Vrhovnemu sodišču Republike Slovenije.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Vrhovno sodišče ugotavlja, da je v konkretnem primeru podan razlog iz 68. člena ZPP. Po tem določilu Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije na predlog stranke ali pristojnega sodišča določi, da naj postopa v posamezni zadevi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče z njegovega območja, če za to obstajajo tehtni razlogi. Funkcija sodnika sodišča, ki bi v tej zadevi sodil na pritožbeni stopnji, in ki dobro pozna vse sodnike na območju sodišča, ki naj bi sodilo na prvi stopnji, je tehten razlog za postopanje po navedeni določbi ZPP. Vrhovno sodišče je zato za odločanje določilo Okrajno sodišče na Vrhniki, ki ne sodi v območje Višjega sodišča v ...