Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSK sklep Cpg 341/99 ECLI:SI:VSKP:1999:CPG.341.99 AI generated

Enforcement suspended for one year without inflow continues with other enforcement means.

Case Number VSK sklep Cpg 341/99
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 creditor's appeal against the first-instance court's decision to suspend monetary enforcement due to a lack of inflow for one year. The creditor argued that the court failed to consider a previously proposed movable property enforcement, but the court found this objection unfounded. The court ruled that since the suspension applied only to monetary assets, the movable property enforcement continued simultaneously.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

2. odst. 141. čl. ZIZ; If enforcement against monetary funds is suspended due to no inflow for one year, enforcement via other means such as movable property continues concurrently.

Keywords

AI generated
enforcement suspension monetary funds movable property ZIZ article 141 concurrent enforcement creditor appeal no inflow period

Cited Legislation

AI generated
2. odst. 141. čl. ZIZ
Pritožbeno sodišče ugotavlja, da je sodišče prve stopnje izpodbijani sklep izdalo v skladu z določilom 2. odst. 141. čl. ZIZ.
AI generated
VSM sklep I Ip 1160/2011
Appeal dismissed; court confirmed enforcement stop due to missing bank account data in official records.
VSL sklep II Cpg 877/99
Appeal granted; enforcement halted due to transitional law conflict between ZIP and ZIZ regarding account freezes.
VSK sklep I Ip 472/2007
Enforcement order partially dismissed; creditor not required to name bank details when using certified document under ZIZ-A.
VSL sklep II Ip 1518/2014
Appeal dismissed; closing debtor's sole bank account fulfills statutory condition to stop enforcement under ZIZ.
VSL Sklep I Ip 106/2025
Appeal dismissed; execution on court deposit account requires seizure of debtor's funds, not court's account.

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 upnika se zavrne kot neutemeljena in p o t r d i izpodbijani sklep sodišča prve stopnje.

[JEDRO]

Če je sodišče ustavilo izvršbo na denarna sredstva na računu dolžnika pri banki, ker eno leto ni bilo priliva, se izvršba z drugimi izvršilnimi sredstvi nadaljuje.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Z izpodbijanim sklepom je sodišče prve stopnje izvršbo na denarna sredstva ustavilo na podlagi 2. odst. 141. čl. Zakona o izvršbi in zavarovanju (ZIZ).

Zoper ta sklep se pritožuje upnik in predlaga njegovo razveljavitev.

V pritožbi navaja, da je dne 26.3.1998 predlagal sodišču nadaljevanje postopka s premičninsko izvršbo, česar pa sodišče prve stopnje ni upoštevalo.

Pritožba upnika ni utemeljena.

Pritožbeno sodišče ugotavlja, da je sodišče prve stopnje izpodbijani sklep izdalo v skladu z določilom 2. odst. 141. čl. ZIZ. Kot je razvidno iz izreka izpodbijanega sklepa je izvršbo ustavilo le glede denarnih sredstev, tako da se premičninska izvršba nadaljuje, saj ni zajeta s sklepom o ustavitvi. Pritožbeno sodišče je zato pritožbo upnika zavrnilo kot neutemeljeno in potrdilo izpodbijani sklep sodišča prve stopnje.