Legislator Case Law & Legislation
VSM sklep Cpg 187/93 ECLI:SI:VSMB:1993:CPG.187.93 AI generated

Enforcement proceeding on a notarial deed is treated as a lawsuit upon debtor's objection regardless of date.

Case Number VSM sklep Cpg 187/93
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal dismissed the debtor's appeal, upholding the first-instance court's decision to treat the enforcement request as a lawsuit. Although the first instance incorrectly applied the new Article 55a of the Enforcement and Security Act, the Court ruled that the pre-1990 version of Article 55 mandated this procedural shift whenever the creditor requested it. Consequently, the enforcement court was correct to suspend execution and refer the matter to a full trial to determine the validity of the claim.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 55 of the Enforcement and Security Act; Article 55a of the Enforcement and Security Act: An enforcement request based on a notarial deed is deemed a lawsuit upon the debtor's objection, regardless of whether the objection is reasoned, provided the creditor requested this procedure in the initial enforcement application.

Keywords

AI generated
enforcement proceeding notarial deed debtor objection procedural conversion Enforcement and Security Act suspension of execution trial on merits

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 55 of the Enforcement and Security Act
Article 55a of the Enforcement and Security Act

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 zavrne kot neutemeljena in se potrdi sklep sodišča prve stopnje.

[JEDRO]

Tudi do 1.7.1990 veljavni člen 55 ZIP je določal, da se v izvršbi na podlagi verodostojne listine po ugovoru dolžnika izvr. predlog obravnava kot tožba, če je upnik tako predlagal v izvršilnem predlogu.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Upnik je dne 22.6.1990 vložil izvršilni predlog na podlagi verodostojne listine. Zoper sklep o izvršbi je dolžnik v ugovarjal in je zato sodišče I. stopnje izdalo sklep, da se bo zadeva obravnavala v pravdi.

Zoper ta sklep se je dolžnik pravočasno pritožil, češ da je njegov ugovor utemeljen.

Pritožba ni utemeljena.

Prvostopno sodišče se je sicer pomotoma uporabilo določilo člena 55a ZIP, ki velja za izvršilne postopke, začete po 1.7.1990. Vendar tudi do navedenega datuma veljavni člen 55 ZIP je določal, da se v izvršbi po verodostojni listini in ugovoru dolžnika obravnava izvr. predlog kot tožba, če je upnik tako predlagal v izvršilnem predlogu.

Izvršilno sodišče vselej na ugovor dolžnika - tudi neobrazložen, razveljavi sklep o dovolitvi izvršbe. O utemeljenosti upnikove terjatve oziroma utemeljenosti dolžnikovega ugovora bo torej sodišče odločilo v pravdnem postopku.