Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 10/96 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1996:I.R.10.96 AI generated

Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court due to judge's familial relation to a party.

Case Number Sklep I R 10/96
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia granted the request to transfer the case to a different competent court. The lower court identified that the defendant's sister was employed there and that the parties were related, creating a conflict of interest. The court ruled that these circumstances constituted a significant reason for transferring the matter to ensure impartiality.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 68 of the Act on Civil Procedure; A higher court may designate another competent court to handle a case if it is evident that the proceedings would be easier or if there are other significant reasons, such as a judge's familial relationship with a party.

Keywords

AI generated
civil procedure jurisdiction transfer judicial impartiality familial relationship conflict of interest competent court Supreme Court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 68 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated
Sklep I R 52/2006
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses transfer of jurisdiction request based on family ties to former court employee.
VSM Sklep I Kr 19957/2020
Court transfers criminal case due to defendant's wife being clerk at local court, risking appearance of bias.
Sklep I R 27/2001
Supreme Court transfers case to another court because a defendant works at the current court.
Sklep I R 179/2007
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction to another district court because the defendant is a staff member there.
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

Predlogu se ugodi in se za odločanje v tej zadevi določi kot pristojno sodišče Okrajno sodišče na V.

[JEDRO]

Okoliščine, da je pri Okrajnem sodišču v C. zaposlena toženčeva sorodnica, da sta tudi pravdni stranki v medsebojnem sorodstvu in da gre za manjše sodišče, predstavljajo tehten razlog, da se v konkretnem primeru določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, ki bo o zadevi odločalo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožnik je vložil dne 5.12.1995 pri Okrajnem sodišču v C. tožbo proti tožencu P. M., s katero je zahteval plačilo tolarske protivrednosti 2.500 DEM. To sodišče je predlagalo, da določi vrhovno sodišče drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, ker je sestrična tožene stranke M. L. zaposlena pri njih kot strojepiska.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Po 68. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku lahko Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije kot najvišje sodišče v državi določi, naj postopa v posamezni zadevi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, če je očitno, da se bo tako laže opravil postopek, ali če so za to drugi tehtni razlogi. Okoliščine, da je pri Okrajnem sodišču v C. zaposlena toženčeva sorodnica, da sta tudi pravdni stranki v medsebojnem sorodstvu in da gre za manjše sodišče, predstavljajo tehten razlog, da se v konkretnem primeru določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, ki bo o zadevi odločalo.

Iz navedenih razlogov je vrhovno sodišče predlogu ugodilo.