Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 88/2009 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:I.R.88.2009 AI generated

Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court due to defendant's extramarital partner being a judge at the original court.

Case Number Sklep I R 88/2009
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia transferred the case to the District Court in B, overriding the original jurisdiction of the District Court in A. The defendant argued that his extramarital relationship with a judge at the original court compromised the court's objective impartiality. The court accepted this argument as a valid reason under the Civil Procedure Act to ensure a fair trial.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act; The Supreme Court may designate a different competent court when it is evident that the proceedings would be conducted more easily or when there are other significant reasons, including the existence of a relationship between a party and a judge at the original court that raises questions of objective impartiality.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act objective impartiality extramarital partner judicial transfer competent court designation conflict of interest procedural fairness

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act

Cited Case Law

AI generated
I R 39/2007
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction to Kamnik because the defendant is a clerk at the Domžalah court.
I R 34/2008
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction to Ljubljana because the defendant is a judge of the Kopre court.
AI generated
VSL Sklep Rg 4/2019
Court dismisses appeal, ruling territorial jurisdiction lies with District Court for non-commercial contract disputes under 20,000 EUR.
VSL Sklep Rg 195/2020
Court dismisses appeal as jurisdiction lies with District Court because defendant is not a commercial entity under ZPP.
Sklep III R 8/2014
Supreme Court rules Ljubljana District Court has jurisdiction over stay of proceedings requests linked to enforcement approval.
VSL sklep I R 46/2012
Appeal dismissed; lawyers are private individuals, not business entities, so district court has jurisdiction.
Sklep III R 38/2010
Supreme Court rules that a tenancy dispute over residential property is exclusively local jurisdiction for the Okrajno sodišče.

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 tej zadevi se določi Okrožno sodišče v B.

[JEDRO]

Okoliščina, da je toženec izvenzakonski partner sodnika pri sodišču, pred katerim teče pravda, je tehten razlog, ki narekuje določitev drugega sodišča za sojenje v tej zadevi.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Po ugovoru zoper sklep o izvršbi na podlagi verodostojne listine je bila zadeva odstopljena Okrožnemu sodišču v A. kot krajevno in stvarno pristojnemu sodišču.

2. Okrožno sodišče v A. je predlagalo, naj Vrhovno sodišče določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče. Navedlo je, da je toženec izvenzakonski partner ene izmed sodnic civilnega oddelka tega sodišča, ta okoliščina pa bi v primeru, da bi v zadevi odločal katerikoli sodnik tega sodišča, mogla vzbuditi vprašanje o objektivni nepristranskosti sodišča.

3. Predlog je utemeljen.

4. 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. Okoliščina, da je toženec izvenzakonski partner sodnice pri Okrožnem sodišču v A., je tak razlog, ki utemeljuje prenos pristojnosti.(1)

5. Vrhovno sodišče je zato predlogu ugodilo in za odločanje v zadevi določilo Okrožno sodišče v B.

---.---

Op. št. (1): Tako tudi npr. sklepa Vrhovnega sodišča I R 39/2007 z dne 28. 3. 2007 in I R 34/2008 z dne 20. 3. 2008.