Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSM sklep I Cpg 16/92 ECLI:SI:VSMB:1993:I.CPG.16.92 AI generated

Appeal against full cost award dismissed due to lack of legal interest for the appellant.

Case Number VSM sklep I Cpg 16/92
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 timely appeal against a first-instance ruling that fully awarded litigation costs to the plaintiff. The appellant argued the defendant had paid the debt, yet the first court had already ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs based on the plaintiff's own cost proposal. The court ruled that since the first instance fully granted the cost claim, the appellant lacked the necessary legal interest to appeal, rendering the appeal inadmissible under the relevant procedural code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

člen 358 ZPP; An appeal is inadmissible when the appellant has no legal interest in it, specifically when the first-instance decision fully grants the cost claim sought by the appellant.

Keywords

AI generated
litigation costs legal interest inadmissible appeal first instance cost award procedural law appellant rights

Cited Legislation

AI generated
člen 358 ZPP
AI generated
Sodba II Ips 458/92
Appeal dismissed; counterclaim filing does not constitute counterclaim under Article 189 ZPP.
VSL Sklep I Cpg 543/2019
Appeal allowed; first instance court erred by rejecting claim due to deceased defendant under new ZPP-E rules.
VSK sodba I Cp 658/2006
Appeal dismissed; differing rulings in identical cases do not automatically violate equality principle under ZPP. Appeal dismissed; differing rulings in identical cases do not automatically violate equality principle under ZPP.
VSL sklep I Cpg 1096/2015
Court partially allows appeal, awarding enforcement costs in bankruptcy proceedings where debt is recognized but not contested.
VSL sodba I Cpg 1372/98
Appeal dismissed for new evidence of coercion not proven until first hearing concluded.

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

Pritožba se kot nedovoljena zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Pritožba zoper izrek o pravdnih stroških, ki so bili stranki v celoti priznani ni dovoljena, ker zanjo stranka nima pravnega interesa.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Prvostopno sodišče dne 27.11.1991 izdalo sklep, s katerim je vzelo na znanje umik tožbe in naložilo toženi stranki, da plača tožeči stranki 2.250,00 sit pravdnih stroškov.

Proti prvostopni sodbi je tožeča stranka vložila pravočasno pritožbo, v kateri navaja, da je tožena stranka plačala dolg med pravdo in je zato tožnica upravičena do pravdnih stroškov po priglašenem stroškovniku.

Pritožba ni dovoljena.

Tožnica je očitno vložila pritožbo v zmotnem prepričanju, da ji niso priznani pravdni stroški. Izrek izpodbijanega sklepa pa je jasno naložil plačilo stroškov toženi stranki. Tudi pri odmeri višine stroškov je prvostopno sodišče sledilo predlogu tožeče stranke.

Po določilu člena 358 ZPP ni dovoljena pritožba, kadar pritožnik zanjo nima pravnega interesa. V izpodbijanem sklepu, kjer je sodišče prve stopnje v celoti ugodilo stroškovnemu zahtevku tožeče stranke, tak pravni interes ne obstoji. Zato je sodišče druge stopnje odločilo kot je razvidno iz izreka.