Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSM sklep Cpg 287/92 ECLI:SI:VSMB:1993:CPG.287.92 AI generated

Court dismisses appeal when claimant fails to declare court fees by end of main hearing under ZPP Art. 164.

Case Number VSM sklep Cpg 287/92
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appellant successfully appealed the first-instance court's fee assessment based on a prior acknowledgment, arguing the court fee tax was not recognized. However, the court found the claimant declared only enforcement costs after the main hearing concluded, missing the deadline for declaring court fees. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, ruling that Article 164 of the Civil Procedure Act limits recognized costs to those declared by the end of the main hearing.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Člen 164 ZPP; Člen 164 ZPP določa, da sodišče upošteva le stroške, ki jih stranka priglasi do konca glavne obravnave, zato naknadne zahteve za priznanje stroškov sodne odločbe niso upoštevne.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act court fees declaration main hearing deadline fee assessment appeal costs recognition

Cited Legislation

AI generated
člen 164 ZPP
AI generated
VSM sodba Cpg 247/94
Appeal against default judgment dismissed; only fundamental procedural violation or duress allows successful appeal.
VSM sodba I Cp 1244/2006
Appeal dismissed; plaintiff failed to prove unanimous consent for heating cost allocation method change.
VSL sklep I Cp 1537/2015
Appeal allowed: joint co-plaintiffs pay one appeal fee collectively despite separate filings.
VSL Sklep II Cpg 228/2019
Appeal dismissed because appellant failed to prove court fee payment without reference, requiring self-submitted proof.
VSL Sklep I Cp 1151/2020
Appeal dismissed because the appellant failed to pay the court fee, a mandatory prerequisite for filing an appeal.

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 o odmeri stroškov v sodbi prvostopnega sodišča.

[JEDRO]

Po določilu člena 164 ZPP sodišče upošteva le stroške, ki jih stranka priglasi do konca glavne obravnave.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožnik se je pravočasno pritožil zoper odmero pravdnih stroškov v sodbi na podlagi pripoznave. V pritožbi je navedel, da mu prvostopno sodišče ni priznalo takse za sodbo.

Pritožba ni utemeljena.

Iz zapisnika z glavne obravnave je razvidno, da tožnica "iz naslova stroškov priglaša 145,60 din za stroške izvršilnega predloga skupaj z zamudnimi obrestmi od izdaje sodne odločbe dalje". Izpodbijana sodba je priznala tožeči stranki priglašene stroške v celoti. Verjetno je tožnica šele po taksnem opominu ugotovila, da mora plačati tudi takso za sodbo. Po določilu člena 164 ZPP sodišče upošteva le stroške, ki jih stranka priglasi do konca glavne obravnave. Zato naknadna zahteva za priznanje strokov ni upoštevna in stranka s pritožbo ne more uspeti.