Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSM sklep Cpg 89/94 ECLI:SI:VSMB:1994:CPG.89.94 AI generated

Bankruptcy court must refer disputed debt portion to court for verification under ZPPSL Art. 127/I.

Case Number VSM sklep Cpg 89/94
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court in Maribor dismissed the appellant's protest against the first-instance court's order to refer a partially disputed debt to judicial verification. The bankruptcy administrator had acknowledged a portion of the creditor's claim while disputing the remainder, which the court deemed a valid partial rejection. Consequently, the court ruled that the administrator must initiate a legal proceeding within eight days to determine the validity of the rejected portion, ensuring the creditor's rights are protected through formal litigation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

člen 127/I Zakona o prisilni poravnavi, stečaju in likvidaciji: When a bankruptcy administrator partially rejects a creditor's claim, the bankruptcy senate must refer the disputed portion to the court for verification within eight days.

Keywords

AI generated
bankruptcy administrator partial claim rejection judicial verification procedure ZPPSL Article 127/I creditor's rights protection debt dispute resolution procedural obligation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
člen 127/I Zakona o prisilni poravnavi, stečaju in likvidaciji (ZPPSL)
AI generated
VSM sklep Cpg 463/94
Bankruptcy law requires creditors to state legal basis for claims; execution request alone is insufficient.
VDS sklep Pdp 63/2001
Appeal dismissed: Heirs of a deceased creditor who contested a claim do not automatically succeed in the bankruptcy proceeding.
VSL sklep I Cpg 42/2011
Appeal allowed; claim for annulment of corporate resolutions is not a bankruptcy claim requiring declaration. Court found first instance misapplied bankruptcy law regarding claim declaration. Claimant must now prove standing under company law despite bankruptcy. Appeal allowed; claim for annulment of corporate resolutions is not a bankruptcy claim requiring declaration. Court found first instance misapplied bankruptcy law regarding claim declaration. Claimant must now prove standing under company law despite bankruptcy.
VSM sklep Cpg 342/94
Bankruptcy court must refer debtor to court for debt verification if administrator fully rejects claim.
VSM sklep Cpg 102/95
Appeal dismissed; bankruptcy administrator's debt recognition triggers mandatory court referral for creditor's objection.

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]

V primeru, ko stečajni upraviltelj prereka upnikovo terjatev, mora stečajni senat po določilu člena 127/I zakona o prisilni poravnavi, stečaju in likvidaciji - v nadaljevanju ZPPSL napotiti stečajnega upnika, da začne v osmih dneh od vročitve sklepa postopek pred sodiščem za ugotovitev prerekanega dela terjatve.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Stečajni upnik se je pravočasno pritožil zoper sklep prvostopnega sodišča, ki je upnika zaradi ugotovitve obstoja prijavljene terjatve tolarske protivrednosti 2.297,35 DEM napotilo na pravdo.

Pritožba ni utemeljena.

Iz zapisnika o drugem naroku za preizkus upniških terjatev, ki je bil opravljen dne 9.12.1993 je razvidno, da je stečajni upravitelj v prerekal terjatev upnikovo terjatev v znesku 3.736,35 DEM za delni znesek 2.297,35 DEM, za presežnih 1.439,00 DEM - v tolarski protivrednosti, pa je terjatev priznal. V takem primeru mora stečajni senat po določilu člena 127/I zakona o prisilni poravnavi, stečaju in likvidaciji - v nadaljevanju ZPPSL (Ur.l. SFRJ št. 84/89, ki se po členu 4 ustavnega zakona za izvedbo ustavne listine ... še uporablja v RS za stečaje, ki so bili začeti pred 1.1.1994), napotiti stečajnega upnika, da začne v osmih dneh od vročitve sklepa postopek pred sodiščem za ugotovitev prerekanega dela terjatve.

Utemeljenost upnikove terjatve se bo torej ugotavljala v pravdnem postopku, če bo upnik vložil tožbo. Upnik si napačno tolmači izpodbijani sklep, da je že odločeno o njegovi terjatvi. Prvostopno sodišče je tudi pravilno opozorilo upnika na rok za vložitev ugotovitvene tožbe in obvezo, da obvesti o tem stečajni senat - le-ta bo samo v takem primeru rezerviral ustrezna sredstva za plačilo prijavljene terjatve do pravnomočne odločitve pravdnega sodišča o tej terjatvi.