Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSM sklep Cpg 351/98 ECLI:SI:VSMB:1998:CPG.351.98 AI generated

Bankruptcy court ruling binding on administrator if creditor proves debt exists and is not time-barred.

Case Number VSM sklep Cpg 351/98
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The bankruptcy court dismissed the creditor's appeal against a referral order directing them to initiate a debt verification procedure. The creditor argued the court made erroneous factual findings and misapplied bankruptcy law, but the court found no grounds to overturn the decision. The court ruled that such a referral binds the administrator if the debt is unexpired and provable, and that the bankruptcy senate had no alternative but to refer the claim to the appropriate process.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 144/I of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act; Article 380(2) of the Civil Procedure Act in conjunction with Article 15 of the Bankruptcy Act: A bankruptcy senate's decision to refer a creditor's claim to a verification procedure binds the administrator if the claim is not time-barred and the creditor can prove its existence.

Keywords

AI generated
bankruptcy administration creditor claim debt verification time-barred claims binding effect procedural referral enforcement proceedings

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 144/I of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act
Article 380(2) of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 15 of the Bankruptcy Act
AI generated
VSK sklep I Cpg 339/2004
Bankruptcy court dismissed appeal; creditor must prove debt existence when reporting non-enforceable documents instead of enforceable titles.
VSM sklep Cpg 102/95
Appeal dismissed; bankruptcy administrator's debt recognition triggers mandatory court referral for creditor's objection.
VSM sklep Cpg 463/94
Bankruptcy law requires creditors to state legal basis for claims; execution request alone is insufficient.
VSM sklep Cpg 342/94
Bankruptcy court must refer debtor to court for debt verification if administrator fully rejects claim.
VSL sklep III Cpg 41/2000
Appeal dismissed because creditor's claim of obtaining enforcement title was raised too late in the 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 kot neutemeljena zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Če stečajni upravitelj ni imel razloga prerekati tistih upnikovih terjatev, ki še niso zastarale in bo upnik v pravdnem ali drugem postopku izkazal njihov obstoj, bo taka odločitev vezala tudi stečajnega upravitelja. Sicer pa stečajni senat nima druge izbire kot upnika, čigar terjatev je stečajni upravitelj (ali drugi upnik) prerekal, napoti s prerekano terjatvijo na ustrezni postopek.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Stečajni senat je s sklepom napotil upnika na začetek postopka zaradi ugotovitve njegove prerekane terjatve 314.662,79 SIT s pp in mu za to določil 15 dnevni rok od prejema sklepa.

Citirani sklep upnik izpodbija s pritožbo, ki vsebuje pritožbena razloga zmotne in nepopolne ugotovitve dejanskega stanja ter zmotne uporabe materialnega prava kot tudi predlog spremembe take odločitve.

Pritožba ni utemeljena.

Če stečajni upravitelj ni imel razloga prerekati tistih upnikovih terjatev, ki še niso zastarale in bo upnik v začetem postopku izkazal njihov obstoj, bo taka odločitev vezala tudi stečajnega upravitelja.

Sicer pa stečajni senat nima druge izbire kot upnika, čigar terjatev je stečajni upravitelj (ali drugi upnik) prerekal, je ni priznal, kot v obravnavanem primeru, napoti s prerekano terjatvijo na ustrezni postopek. Vsa odločilna dejstva za tako odločitev so torej bila ugotovljena, določba člena 144/I Zakona o prisilni poravnavi, stečaju in likvidaciji, je bila uporabljena pravilno. Pri tem stečajni senat tudi ni storil nobene absolutne bistvene kršitve določb postopka, zato je njegova odločitev potrjena po točki 2 člena 380 Zakona o pravdnem postopku v zvezi s členom 15 ZPPSL.