Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III Ips 220/2008 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:III.IPS.220.2008 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses late appeal as first instance court already rejected it under procedural law.

Case Number Sklep III Ips 220/2008
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 applicant's appeal, ruling it inadmissible due to procedural timeliness. The first instance court had already dismissed the appeal as untimely before the new procedural law took effect. Consequently, the Supreme Court applied the old law and confirmed the rejection because the appeal was filed after the statutory deadline expired.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

367. odst. 1 ZPP; 111. odst. 2 ZPP: An appeal filed after the expiration of the thirty-day period following the service of the judgment is inadmissible, and the Supreme Court must uphold the first instance court's decision on untimeliness.

Keywords

AI generated
procedural timeliness admissibility of appeal service of judgment statutory deadline retroactive application of law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367. odst. 1 ZPP
111. odst. 2 ZPP
377. odst. 1 ZPP
AI generated
Sklep III Ips 210/2008
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses appeal where separate damage claims fall below monetary threshold for review.
Sklep III Ips 205/2008
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses appeal in construction contract dispute due to insufficient value threshold for review.
Sodba III Ips 51/2010
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses appeal rejecting partial contract termination argument where parties agreed on consequences.
Sklep III Ips 154/2009
Appeal dismissed for lack of signature; court rejected incomplete appeal without supplementation procedure. Appeal dismissed due to missing signature; court refused supplementation per statutory rule. Appeal dismissed for lack of signature; court applied statutory rule without supplementation. Appeal dismissed for missing signature; court refused supplementation per statutory provision.
Sklep III Ips 50/2013
Supreme Court dismisses appeal because defendant company deleted from register and has no legal successors.

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]

Revizija stranke je prepozna.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Obravnavani postopek se je pred sodiščem prve stopnje končal pred uveljavitvijo Zakona o spremembah in dopolnitvah Zakona o pravdnem postopku - ZPP-D (Uradni list RS, št. 45/2008). Zato se po drugem odstavku njegovega 130. člena nadaljuje po dosedanjih določbah Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP, Uradni list RS, št. 73/2007 - uradno prečiščeno besedilo).

2. Zoper pravnomočno sodbo, izdano na drugi stopnji, lahko stranke vložijo revizijo v tridesetih dneh od vročitve prepisa sodbe (prvi odstavek 367. člena ZPP).

3. Iz vročilnice pripete k listovni številki 142 spisa in prvega stavka revizije tožeče stranke izhaja, da je bila sodba sodišča druge stopnje odvetniku Aljoši Drobniču, ki je tožečo stranko zastopal v pritožbenem postopku, vročena 18. 8. 2008. Tridesetdnevni rok za vložitev revizije je po določbi drugega odstavka 111. člena ZPP začel teči naslednji dan, to je 19. 8. 2008. Iztekel se je 17. 9. 2008, kar pomeni, da je revizija, ki jo je tožeča stranka pri sodišču prve stopnje vložila 18. 9. 2008, prepozna.

4. Prepozno revizijo je Vrhovno sodišče zavrglo na podlagi 377. člena ZPP, ker tega v mejah svojih pravic ni storilo že sodišče prve stopnje.