Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 413/2008 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:II.IPS.413.2008 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal because the disputed amount falls below the statutory revision threshold in civil proceedings.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 413/2008
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia rejected the revision filed by the appellant against a final judgment reducing damages from 800,000 to 400,000 SIT. Although the appellant raised serious procedural and constitutional arguments, the court found the revision inadmissible because the value of the disputed portion, approximately 2,921 EUR, did not exceed the statutory threshold of 4,172.93 EUR under Article 367(2) of the Civil Procedure Act. Consequently, the court held that the right to appeal to the Supreme Court was not triggered by the financial value of the case.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367(2) of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 377 of the Civil Procedure Act: A revision is not permitted in civil property disputes where the value of the disputed part of the final judgment does not exceed the statutory threshold.

Keywords

AI generated
revision threshold Civil Procedure Act final judgment value admissibility of appeal supreme court jurisdiction

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367(2) of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 377 of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
VSL sodba I Cp 155/2009
Appeal dismissed; first-instance court bound by small claims procedure facts; damages assessment upheld.
VSM Sodba I Cpg 297/2018
Court allows appeal against bank director's conflict of interest ruling, remanding for damages calculation.
VSL sodba II Cp 441/2009
Appeal dismissed; court upheld damages calculation and rejected unjust enrichment claim due to lack of evidence.
Sklep II Ips 542/2001
Appeal dismissed as claim value under 1 million SIT; cost ruling appeal inadmissible per procedural law.
Sklep II Ips 39/2003
Appeal dismissed because the disputed amount in the civil tort case did not exceed the statutory threshold for review. The court held that the claim for damages for mental suffering and funeral expenses combined did not surpass the limit. Consequently, the appeal was rejected as inadmissible under the Code of Civil Procedure. The court ruled that the appeal was inadmissible because the disputed value in the civil tort claim did not exceed the statutory threshold for review. The court held that the combined claim for mental suffering and funeral expenses did not surpass the limit. Consequently, the appeal was rejected as inadmissible under the Code of Civil Procedure.

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

Revizija se zavrže.

[JEDRO]

Ker vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe ne presega revizijskega praga iz drugega odstavka 367. člena ZPP, revizija ni dovoljena.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je odločilo, da mora R. T. solidarno s Č. V. plačati 300.000 SIT A. S., sam pa še 800.000 SIT odškodnine z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi.

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbi R. T. delno ugodilo tako, da je znesek odškodnine 800.000 SIT znižalo na 400.000 SIT.

3. Zoper sodbo pritožbenega sodišča je R. T. vložil revizijo. Uveljavlja revizijske razloge absolutne bistvene kršitve določb pravdnega postopka, relativne bistvene kršitve določb pravdnega postopka pred sodiščem druge stopnje in zmotne uporabe materialnega prava; poleg tega kot razlog za vložitev revizije navaja kršitev ustavnih pravic tožeče stranke.

4. Revizija je bila vročena tožniku, ki nanjo ni odgovoril, in Vrhovnemu državnemu tožilstvu Republike Slovenije (375. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku, v nadaljevanju ZPP).

5. Revizija ni dovoljena.

6. Po določbi drugega odstavka 367. člena ZPP je revizija dovoljena v tistih premoženjskih sporih, v katerih vrednost z njo izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe presega znesek 4.172,93 EUR (prej 1.000.000 SIT). V konkretnem primeru znaša vrednost, glede katere je prvi toženec vložil revizijo, 2.921,04 EUR (prej 700.000 SIT).

7. Ker vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe ne presega revizijskega praga iz drugega odstavka 367. člena ZPP, revizija ni dovoljena in jo je Vrhovno sodišče skladno z določbo 377. člena ZPP zavrglo.