Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II DoR 1/2009 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:II.DOR.1.2009 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses review request as statutory conditions for review under ZPP are not met.

Case Number Sklep II DoR 1/2009
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 defendant's request to allow a review of the second-instance judgment. The lower courts had placed the minor children in the mother's care and ordered the father to pay alimony after he acknowledged paternity. The Supreme Court found that the specific conditions required to permit a review under the first paragraph of Article 367a of the Code of Civil Procedure were not satisfied, leading to the dismissal of the request.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a of the Code of Civil Procedure; A review request is inadmissible when the statutory conditions for its allowance under the first paragraph of Article 367a are not met.

Keywords

AI generated
Code of Civil Procedure review request alimony obligation paternity acknowledgment minor children custody Supreme Court review procedural admissibility

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a of the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
VSL Sodba IV Cp 1100/2021
Court upholds father's visitation rights despite mother's alienation claims, rejecting remote-only contact requirement.
VSC sklep Cp 16/2008
Appeal allowed; child custody decision reversed for failure to explain reasoning and assess current circumstances.
VSL sklep IV Cp 292/2015
Appeal dismissed; temporary alimony for minor child requires urgent threat to survival, not just financial need.
VSL Sklep IV Cp 1285/2019
Appeal dismissed; temporary support order rejected due to insufficient factual basis for preventing irreparable harm to child.
VSL sodba IV Cp 3119/2014
Appeal dismissed; court upheld custody transfer to father due to mother's unreasonably blocking contact.

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

Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena ZPP niso podani.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Predlog se zavrne.

OBRAZLOŽITEV:

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je mladoletna T. R. in S. R., ki ju je 13. 11. 2007 izven zakona rodila M. R., očetovstvo pa je z izjavo pri pristojnem centru za socialno delo priznal R. P., dodelilo v varstvo in vzgojo materi, očeta pa zavezalo zanju plačevati preživnino. Sodišče druge stopnje je takšno sodbo potrdilo.

2. R. P. je Vrhovnemu sodišču predlagal, naj zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje dopusti revizijo.

3. Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) niso podani, zato je Vrhovno sodišče toženčev predlog zavrnilo (tretji odstavek 367. člena ZPP).