Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 291/94 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1995:II.IPS.291.94 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because plaintiff failed to state claim value in currency, only using points.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 291/94
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 defendant against a second-instance judgment that had reversed a first-instance dismissal. The plaintiff had originally sued for a sum denominated in 'points' rather than a specific monetary amount, which the court held constituted a failure to comply with statutory requirements for stating the value of the subject matter. Consequently, the court determined that the plaintiff did not meet the threshold necessary to exercise the right of appeal in this non-monetary property dispute.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

2. odstavek 186. člen ZPP; 3. odstavek 382. člen ZPP: In property disputes not involving monetary claims, an appeal is inadmissible if the plaintiff fails to state the value of the subject matter in a monetary unit, thereby forfeiting the right to appeal.

Keywords

AI generated
inadmissible appeal value of subject matter monetary unit requirement property dispute threshold forfeiture of appeal right

Cited Legislation

AI generated
2. odstavek 186. člen ZPP
3. odstavek 382. člen ZPP
392. člen ZPP

Cited Case Law

AI generated
Pravna mnenja, št. II/94, str. 5, 6
V točkah (po analogiji s taksno in odvetniško tarifo) označena vrednost spora pomeni, da tožnik vrednosti spornega predmeta ni navedel (primerjaj pravno mnenje Občne seje VS RS z dne 14.12.1994, Pravna mnenja, št. II/94, str. 5, 6).
AI generated
Sklep X Ips 218/2013
Supreme Court dismisses appeal in land parcelation case due to lack of severe consequences and monetary threshold. Appeal dismissed as no severe consequences or monetary threshold met for review. Court rejects appeal in land parcelation case citing lack of severe consequences and monetary threshold. Appeal dismissed because no severe consequences or monetary threshold met for review. Court rejects appeal in land parcelation case due to lack of severe consequences and monetary threshold. Appeal dismissed as no severe consequences or monetary threshold met for review. Court rejects appeal in land parcelation case citing lack of severe consequences and monetary threshold.
VSRS Sklep X Ips 9/2016
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses appeal as non-essential legal issue due to established precedent on statute of limitations.
VSRS Sklep X Ips 245/2014
Supreme Court dismisses tax appeal review as inadmissible because the legal issue was not new or significant.
Sklep X Ips 371/2011
Supreme Court dismisses appeal as it raises factual, not legal, questions and fails to show severe consequences.
VSRS Sklep X Ips 89/2015
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses administrative appeal for failure to prove severe consequences of the rejected application.

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 spornega predmeta mora tožnik v skladu z 2. odstavkom 186. člena ZPP navesti v denarni enoti. V točkah (po analogiji s taksno in odvetniško tarifo) označena vrednost spora pomeni, da tožnik vrednosti spornega predmeta ni navedel (primerjaj pravno mnenje Občne seje VS RS z dne 14.12.1994, Pravna mnenja, št. II/94, str. 5, 6).

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek tožeče stranke. Sodišče druge stopnje je ugodilo pritožbi tožeče stranke in sodbo sodišča prve stopnje tako spremenilo, da je tožbenemu zahtevku ugodilo.

Proti sodbi sodišča druge stopnje je vložila revizijo tožena stranka. Uveljavlja revizijska razloga zmotne uporabe materialnega prava in bistvene kršitve določb pravdnega postopka. Revizijskemu sodišču predlaga, da izpodbijano sodbo tako spremeni, da pritožbo zavrne in potrdi sodbo sodišča prve stopnje.

Revizija ni dovoljena.

Po 3. odstavku 382. člena ZPP revizije ni v premoženjskopravnih sporih, v katerih se tožbeni zahtevek ne nanaša na denarno terjatev, če vrednost spornega predmeta, ki jo je tožnik navedel v tožbi, ne presega določen znesek. V času vložitve tožbe (30.10.1992) je bil to znesek 8.000,00 SIT (Ur.l. SFRJ, št. 20/90). Vrednost spornega predmeta mora tožnik v skladu z 2. odstavkom 186. člena ZPP navesti v denarni enoti. V točkah (po analogiji s taksno in odvetniško tarifo) označena vrednost spora pomeni, da tožnik vrednosti spornega predmeta ni navedel (primerjaj pravno mnenje Občne seje VS RS z dne 14.12.1994, Pravna mnenja, št. II/94, str. 5, 6). Če pa je ni navedel, si ni zagotovil pravice do revizije.

Tožeča stranka je v tožbi navedla kot vrednost spornega predmeta 3.000 točk. Revizija je zato nedovoljena. Nedovoljeno revizijo pa mora revizijsko sodišče po 392. členu ZPP zavreči.