Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 34/96 ECLI:SI:VSRS:1996:I.R.34.96 AI generated

Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court when plaintiff is a high-ranking staff member there.

Case Number Sklep I R 34/96
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 plaintiff's request to transfer the case to a different competent court. The plaintiff, a high-ranking staff member at the originally designated court, argued that the transfer would facilitate the proceedings and ensure fair handling of evidence previously processed in a related matter. The court ruled that the plaintiff's employment status at the original court constituted a significant reason for the transfer under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure; A transfer of proceedings to another competent court is permitted when the plaintiff is a high-ranking staff member of the originally designated court, as this constitutes a significant reason to facilitate the proceedings.

Keywords

AI generated
Code of Civil Procedure transfer of proceedings competent court plaintiff employment significant reason procedural efficiency Supreme Court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 68 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
VSRS Sklep I R 193/2019
Supreme Court transfers case to Ljubljana due to conflict of interest involving plaintiff and court's health service provider.
VSM Sklep I Kr 32383/2019
Court rejects transfer of criminal jurisdiction due to lack of objective doubt regarding defense lawyer's impartiality.
Sklep I R 38/2013
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction to Trbovlje court due to defendant's age and health burdens.
Sklep I R 93/2007
Slovenian Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court due to judge's relationship with a party.
Sklep I Kr 4/94
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction to the court where the victim's lawyer works due to procedural impracticality.

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 Okrožno sodišče v K.

[JEDRO]

Okoliščina, da je tožnica višja strokovna sodelavka pri sodišču, ki naj bi obravnavalo to pravdno zadevo, predstavlja tehten razlog, da se za obravnavanje določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožnica je vložila pri Okrožnem sodišču v L. tožbo proti K. L., s katero je zahtevala, da ji tožena stranka zagotovi najmanj dvakrat letno kontrolne preglede na določeni kliniki v tujini. V tožbi je navajala, da je zaposlena kot višja strokovna sodelavka na Okrožnem sodišču v L. Zato naj se zadeva delegira na Okrožno sodišče v K., kamor je bila po sklepu Višjega sodišča v L. poslana odškodninska zadeva med istima pravdnima strankama, v kateri se bodo obravnavali isti dokazi.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Po 68.čl. 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. Okoliščina, da je tožnica višja strokovna sodelavka pri sodišču, ki naj bi obravnavalo to pravdno zadevo, predstavlja tehten razlog, da se za obravnavanje določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče.

Zato je vrhovno sodišče predlogu ugodilo.