Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 531/95 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1996:II.IPS.531.95 AI generated

Court dismisses appeal withdrawal claim requiring explicit mention in general settlement for judicial consideration.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 531/95
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appellate court dismissed the appellant's request to have the withdrawal of the appeal ascertained. The parties had reached a general settlement covering all pending civil and enforcement matters, which included mutual withdrawal of claims but did not explicitly mention the withdrawal of the appeal. The court ruled that because the settlement document failed to expressly state the withdrawal of the appeal, the lower court was obligated to ascertain this fact before considering it relevant.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 399 of the Code of Civil Procedure; Article 349, paragraph 2: A party may withdraw an appeal before the appellate court issues a decision, but the court must ascertain the withdrawal if it is not explicitly mentioned in a general settlement between the parties.

Keywords

AI generated
withdrawal of appeal general settlement Code of Civil Procedure appellate court ascertainment of fact

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 399 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 349, paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
VSL Sodba I Cp 1248/2018
Appeal dismissed; bad faith negates land registry trust principle when seller knew of remaining shares.
VSL sodba I Cp 235/2011
Court rejects ownership claim based on adverse possession before nationalization due to insufficient possession duration.
Sodba II Ips 139/94
Appeal dismissed; plaintiff failed to prove oral co-ownership agreement for property title transfer.
Sklep II Ips 274/98
Appeal dismissed in property dispute where claimed value fell below statutory threshold for review. Appeal barred by value limit rules. Court applied transitional law rules. Appeal rejected due to insufficient property value threshold. Court applied transitional law rules. Appeal rejected due to insufficient property value threshold.
VSK sklep in sodba I Cp 399/2005
Appeal partially allowed; good faith in execution requires mortgagee based on contract, not law alone.

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

Ugotovi se umik revizije.

[JEDRO]

Ob generalni poravnavi med pravdnima strankama v vseh njunih pravdnih in izvršilnih zadevah mora biti izrecno naveden umik revizije, če naj ga sodišče upošteva kot relevantnega.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je s sodbo zavrnilo tožničin tožbeni zahtevek, naj se ugotovi, da je solastnica do 1/4 stanovanjske hiše v K., in da ji morata toženca izstaviti ustrezno zemljiškoknjižno listino, s sklepom pa ji je naložilo, naj povrne tožencema pravdne stroške. Njeno pritožbo proti tej odločbi je sodišče druge stopnje s sodbo zavrnilo in jo potrdilo.

Proti slednji sodbi je tožeča stranka vložila revizijo iz vseh revizijskih razlogov. Še pred odločitvijo o reviziji pa je sodišče prejelo "skupno vlogo pravdnih strank" z dne 18.12.1995, ki jo je sestavil pooblaščenec tožene stranke in ki vsebuje sporazum strank o umikih vseh tožb, izvršilnih predlogov in vseh drugih odprtih medsebojnih zadev, pri čemer trpi vsaka stranka svoje stroške v vseh sporih in izvršbah. Tožnica je na poziv sodišča z vlogo z dne 19.2.1996 sporočila, da vsebuje omenjena skupna vloga tudi umik revizije v tej zadevi.

Po 399. členu v zvezi z drugim odstavkom 349. člena zakona o pravdnem postopku lahko stranka umakne že vloženo revizijo, dokler revizijsko sodišče ne izda o njej odločbe. Ker gre za takšen primer, je moralo sodišče ugotoviti umik revizije.