Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 115/2008 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2008:I.R.115.2008 AI generated

General claims of bias and procedural delay are insufficient grounds for transferring jurisdiction under ZPP Art. 67.

Case Number Sklep I R 115/2008
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 dismissed a defendant's request to transfer a civil execution case from the District Court in Domžale to another court. The defendant argued that the original court was biased and that the higher court always upholds its rulings, while also claiming intentional delay. The court rejected these generalized assertions as insufficient substantive reasons under Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure Law, ruling that such vague claims do not justify a change of jurisdiction.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure Law; Generalized allegations of judicial bias and procedural delay without concrete evidence do not constitute sufficient grounds for the Supreme Court to transfer jurisdiction to another court.

Keywords

AI generated
transfer of jurisdiction civil procedure law judicial bias procedural delay Supreme Court decision ZPP Article 67 district court competence

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure Law (ZPP)
AI generated
VSL Sklep I Cp 663/2022
Appeal dismissed; final success rule under ZPP Art. 154 prevails over partial non-participation.
VSK sklep II Ip 926/2007
Appeal dismissed; debt discharge by vehicle handover proven via witness testimony under free evaluation of evidence.
VSL Sklep I Cp 674/2019
Appeal dismissed; suspension of proceedings due to pending lease termination legality is improper.
Sklep I R 17/2006
Supreme Court rejects request to transfer jurisdiction due to unproven claims of bias.
Sklep I R 21/2012
Slovenian Supreme Court rejects jurisdiction transfer request based on alleged bias in other proceedings.

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

Predlog se zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Posplošene trditve o pristranskem obravnavanju in namernem zavlačevanju postopka niso tehtni razlogi za prenos pristojnosti.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

V pravdni zadevi, v kateri je Okrajno sodišče v Domžalah vodilo izvršilni postopek, sedaj pa pravdni postopek zaradi izterjave denarne terjatve, je toženec oz. dolžnik vložil več pravdnih sredstev, med njimi tudi predlog, da se zadeva dodeli v odločanje drugemu okrajnemu sodišču, ki bo tudi njemu in njegovim najbližjim spoštovalo temeljne človekove pravice in svoboščine. Ker trdi, da se z odločitvami Okrajnega sodišča v Domžalah vedno strinja tudi Višje sodišče v Ljubljani, predlaga, naj Vrhovno sodišče to upošteva.

Predlog ni utemeljen.

Po 67. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP)(1) lahko Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, da postopa v zadevi, če je očitno, da se bo tako laže opravil postopek, ali če so za to drugi tehtni razlogi.

Posplošene trditve o pristranskem obravnavanju in namernem zavlačevanju pri Okrajnem sodišču v Domžalah ter neresnična trditev, da Višje sodišče v Ljubljani vedno potrdi odločitve prvega sodišča, niso tehtni razlogi za prenos pristojnosti. Vrhovno sodišče zato predlogu dolžnika ni ugodilo.

---.---

Op. št. (1): Uradni list RS, št. 26/1999 - 45/2008