Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III R 3/2002 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2002:III.R.3.2002 AI generated

Former client's lawyer now being a judge in the case requires changing the competent court.

Case Number Sklep III R 3/2002
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 Slovenia designated the District Court in Maribor as the competent court for the economic dispute. The respondent argued that the former client's lawyer now serves as a judge in the District Court of Slovenj Gradc, where the case was previously heard. The court ruled that this conflict of interest constitutes a significant reason to transfer jurisdiction, citing Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act; A former client's lawyer who now serves as a judge in a court hearing the same economic dispute constitutes a significant reason for determining a different competent court.

Keywords

AI generated
conflict of interest competent court former client's lawyer judicial impartiality Civil Procedure Act jurisdiction transfer economic dispute

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
VSRS Sklep I R 41/2022
Supreme Court transfers case to another district court due to perceived lack of judicial impartiality.
Sklep I R 30/2002
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses transfer request where client's relative is retired court employee.
Sklep III R 34/2007
Supreme Court rejects request for court transfer due to alleged bias, citing lack of legal basis and exhaustion of remedies.
Sklep I R 40/2001
Supreme Court transfers non-litigation case to nearest court due to judge's employment bias.
Sklep I R 40/97
Supreme Court transfers enforcement case to another court due to defendant's employment there creating a significant reason.

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

Kot drugo krajevno pristojno sodišče za odločanje v sporu se določi Okrožno sodišče v Mariboru.

[JEDRO]

Dejstvo, da je bivši pooblaščenec tožene stranke sedaj sodnik sodišča, pred katerim teče zadevni gospodarski spor, je tehten razlog za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča. (To velja tudi, če bivši pooblaščenec v gospodarskem sporu ne sodi, temveč je na sodišču zgolj zaposlen kot eden od sodnikov.)

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožena stranka je predlagala, naj Vrhovno sodišče v gospodarskem sporu Pg 76/97, ki teče med njo in tožečo stranko, določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče. Navedla je, da je toženca v istem gospodarskem sporu že zastopal ..., ki je sedaj sodnik okrožnega sodišča v Slovenj Gradcu.

Predlog je utemeljen.

To, da je bivši pooblaščenec tožene stranke sedaj sodnik Okrožnega sodišča v Slovenj Gradcu in da pred tem sodiščem teče zadevni gospodarski spor, je tehten razlog za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča (67. člen ZPP). Vrhovno sodišče je odločilo, da bo to Okrožno sodišče v Mariboru.