Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSL sklep III Cpg 112/99 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:1999:III.CPG.112.99 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because the claimant failed to file the appeal within the statutory time limit.

Case Number VSL sklep III Cpg 112/99
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the appeal lodged by the bankruptcy administrator against a first-instance decision regarding court fees. The administrator argued for review of the lower court's ruling on unpaid taxes and penalties, but the appeal was filed on September 15, 1999, after the fifteen-day deadline expired on September 3. Consequently, the appellate court did not examine the merits of the case and rejected the appeal as untimely.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o sodnem postopku (ZPP) in Zakon o izvršbi in zavarovanju (ZIZ): An appeal filed after the expiration of the statutory time limit is inadmissible, and the appellate court is not obligated to examine the substantive correctness of the contested decision.

Keywords

AI generated
inadmissible appeal statutory time limit bankruptcy administrator court fees procedural prerequisites

Cited Legislation

AI generated
352. člen ZPP
351. člen ZPP
15. člen ZIZ
2. odst. 30. člen ZST
2. odst. 111. člen ZPP
AI generated
VSL sklep III Cpg 69/99
Court upheld tax assessment for bankruptcy trustee, rejecting appeal on cap and valuation date grounds.
VSL sklep I Cpg 1387/2000
Court dismisses appeal for non-payment of court fees for a judgment regardless of case outcome.
VSL sklep II Cpg 1366/99
Appeal partially allowed; 100% fee increase rule for appeals does not apply to enforcement proceedings.
VSL sklep II Cpg 998/99
Appeal allowed; court ruled tax liability arises upon filing execution request, not withdrawal, and enforcement requires tax office for individuals.
VSL sklep I Cpg 1307/2000
Appeal allowed: Court fees debt arising before bankruptcy cannot be forcibly collected under ZPPSL.

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 zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Če so manjkale procesne predpostavke dopustnosti pravnega sredstva (pritožba namreč ni bila vložena pravočasno), pritožbeno sodišče ni preizkušalo pravilnosti izpodbijanega sklepa sodišča prve stopnje.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je ugotovilo, da stečajni upnik kot taksni zavezanec ni pravočasno plačal sodne takse za prijavo terjatve v znesku 27.000,00 SIT ter za opomin v višini 3.000,00 SIT. Zaradi tega je dolžan plačati še kazensko takso v znesku 13.500,00 SIT. Naročilo je Agenciji Republike Slovenije za plačilni promet, da znesek 45.000,00 SIT prenese z računa taksnega zavezanca na račun sodnih taks.

Zoper ta sklep je upnik dne 15.9.1999 vložil pritožbo.

Pritožba je prepozna.

Citirani sklep je bil upniku vročen v četrtek, dne 19.8.1999. Rok petnajstih dni za vložitev pritožbe iz 2. odst. 30. člena ZST je potekel v petek 3.9.1999 (2. odst. 111. člena ZPP). Stečajni upnik je pritožbo poslal po telefaksu dne 15.9.1999. To je razvidno iz same pritožbe v spisu. Torej je bila pritožba vložena po poteku petnajstdnevnega roka in je zato prepozna. Iz tega razloga je sodišče druge stopnje pritožbo na podlagi 352. člena ZPP v zvezi s 351. členom ZPP in s 15. členom ZIZ zavrglo.