Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSL sklep I Cpg 987/2000 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2000:I.CPG.987.2000 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because plaintiff lacked right to appeal against appellate court's confirmation of first-instance dismissal.

Case Number VSL sklep I Cpg 987/2000
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 appeal filed by the defendant against the first-instance judgment. The defendant argued for the revocation of the appellate court's decision confirming the dismissal of their protest. The court ruled that the appellant had no legal standing to appeal the appellate court's confirmation of the first-instance decision regarding the withdrawal of the protest.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

363. člen ZPP; 384. člen ZPP: An appeal against a decision of the appellate court confirming a first-instance decision is inadmissible as the appellant lacks the right to appeal such a confirmation.

Keywords

AI generated
procedural standing appellate confirmation inadmissible appeal withdrawal of protest ZPP provisions

Cited Legislation

AI generated
363. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
384. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
490. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
VSL sklep II Cpg 1072/99
Appeal dismissed; review against final enforcement judgment in execution proceedings is not permitted by law.
VSC Sklep I Cp 323/2021
Appeal against second-instance dismissal of appeal is rejected as only extraordinary remedies apply. Appeal against second-instance decision requires extraordinary remedies under ZPP. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible as only extraordinary remedies apply. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply under ZPP. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply per ZPP. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply. Appeal against second-instance decision is inadmissible; only extraordinary remedies apply.
VSC Sklep I Cp 216/2021
Appeal dismissed because the appeal against the first-instance court's dismissal of the appeal was itself inadmissible under ZPP.
VSL sklep V Cpg 1757/2014
Appeal against costs ruling within a final judgment dismissed as lacking statutory basis and legal interest.
Sklep I Up 744/2007
Supreme Court dismisses appeal against administrative court ruling as appeal against Supreme Court decision is inadmissible.

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 in se potrdi sklep sodišča prve stopnje.

[JEDRO]

Pravilno je stališče sodišča prve stopnje, da pritožnik ni imel pravice do pritožbe proti sklepu pritožbenega sodišča, s katerim je potrdilo sklep prve stopnje o domnevi umika napovedi pritožbe (sklep opr. št. ... z dne ...; prim. 363. čl. Zakona o pravdnem postopku - v nadaljevanju ZPP).

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Sodišče prve stopnje je z izpodbijanim sklepom zavrglo "pritožbo" tožene stranke proti sklepu Višjega sodišča v Ljubljani opr. št. I ... z dne .... Proti temu sklepu vlaga pravočasno pritožbo tožena stranka. V pritožbi smiselno uveljavlja pritožbeni razlog kršitve določb ZPP. Pritožbenemu sodišču predlaga, naj izpodbijani sklep razveljavi. Pritožba ni utemeljena. Pravilno je stališče sodišča prve stopnje, da pritožnik ni imel pravice do pritožbe proti sklepu pritožbenega sodišča, s katerim je potrdilo sklep prve stopnje o domnevi umika napovedi pritožbe (sklep opr.

št. I ... z dne ...; prim. 363. čl. Zakona o pravdnem postopku - v nadaljevanju ZPP). Pa tudi, če bi vlogo pritožnika z dne 9.6.2000 šteli za revizijo, je izpodbijani sklep pravilen. Po 490. čl. ZPP je revizija v gospodarskem sporu dovoljena, če vrednost spornega predmeta presega znesek 5.000.000,00 SIT. In ker se v konkretnem primeru spor tiče zneska 323.659,50 SIT, revizija ni dovoljena (2. odst. 384. čl. ZPP). Glede na navedeno je pritožbeno sodišče pritožbo zavrnilo in potrdilo sklep sodišča prve stopnje, potem ko je ugotovilo, da tudi niso podani razlogi, na katere pazi po uradni dolžnosti (2. tč. 365.

čl. ZPP).