Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 96/2009 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:I.R.96.2009 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers case to another court because plaintiff is a judge at the original court.

Case Number Sklep I R 96/2009
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia designated the District Court in B as the competent court for the property ownership dispute. The plaintiff, a judge at the originally competent District Court in A, argued that her position created a conflict of interest. The court ruled that her status as a judge at the original venue was a significant reason necessitating a transfer to ensure public perception of impartiality.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure; if it is obvious that the proceedings will be easier if another competent court decides, or if there are other significant reasons, the Supreme Court may designate another competent court, including when the plaintiff is a judge at the original court to ensure public perception of impartiality.

Keywords

AI generated
civil procedure court designation conflict of interest judicial impartiality public perception competent court transfer of proceedings

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated
Sklep I R 25/2009
Supreme Court transfers case to another district court due to judge's father being the defendant.
Sklep I R 63/2001
Supreme Court transfers divorce case to another district court due to judge's conflict of interest.
VSRS Sklep I R 10/2025
Court rejects jurisdiction delegation request based on clerical staff's role and lack of close ties to judges.
Sklep I R 29/95
Supreme Court delegates case to Radovljica District Court for procedural efficiency under ZPP Art. 68.
VSRS Sklep I R 48/2019
Supreme Court orders transfer of case to ensure objective impartiality when judge is spouse of opposing party.

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

Za odločanje v zadevi se določi Okrožno sodišče v B.

[JEDRO]

Okoliščina, da je tožnica sodnica pri sodišču, pri katerem je vložena tožba, je tehten razlog, ki narekuje odločitev drugega sodišča za sojenje v tej zadevi.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Tožnica je pri Okrožnem sodišču v A. kot krajevno in stvarno pristojnem sodišču vložila tožbo za ugotovitev lastninske pravice. Hkrati je navedla, da je sodnica pri tem sodišču in da zato predlaga, naj Vrhovno sodišče določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče za odločanje v zadevi.

2. Predlog je utemeljen.

3. Po 67. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku 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.

4. Okoliščina, da je tožnica sodnica pri Okrožnem sodišču v A. kot sicer stvarno in krajevno pristojnem sodišču za odločanje v tej zadevi, bi mogla negativno vplivati na percepcijo javnosti o objektivni nepristranskosti sodišča v sporu. Zato je Vrhovno sodišče predlogu ugodilo in za odločanje v zadevi določilo krajevno najbližje stvarno pristojno sodišče, tj. Okrožno sodišče v B.