Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 120/2009 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:I.R.120.2009 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers case to Radovljica to ensure public perception of objective impartiality of Jesenice court.

Case Number Sklep I R 120/2009
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 transferred the case from the Jesenice District Court to the Radovljica District Court upon the plaintiff's request. The Jesenice court accepted the transfer request, arguing that the plaintiff's involvement in proceedings there could negatively impact public perception of its impartiality. The court ruled that while delegation is primarily for procedural efficiency, it can also serve as a weighty reason to address concerns regarding objective impartiality.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku (ZPP) 67. člen; Delegation of jurisdiction to another competent court is permitted not only for procedural efficiency but also when there are weighty reasons, including doubts regarding the objective impartiality of the court in the eyes of the public.

Keywords

AI generated
jurisdiction transfer objective impartiality public perception delegation of jurisdiction procedural efficiency district court weighty reasons

Cited Legislation

AI generated
67. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
VSRS Sklep I R 23/2025
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction due to law clerk's employment by opposing counsel.
Sklep I R 66/2002
Supreme Court transfers case to Celje Court due to employee's employment at Žalec Court raising impartiality doubts.
Sklep I R 14/95
Court transfers jurisdiction to Postojna because the plaintiff's former colleague was a judge at the original court.
VSRS Sklep I R 108/2017
Appeal dismissed; court rejected transfer of jurisdiction due to defendant's own conduct creating appearance of bias.
VSRS Sklep I R 114/2017
Supreme Court clarifies that property division cases under ZZZDR are judged by value, not family law rules, determining territorial jurisdiction.

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 Okrajno sodišče v Radovljici.

[JEDRO]

Dejstvo, da je predmet tožbe postopanje Okrajnega sodišča na Jesenicah, bi moglo negativno vplivati na percepcijo javnosti o objektivni nepristranskosti tega sodišča pri odločanju o obravnavani tožbi.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Tožniki so pri Okrajnem sodišču na Jesenicah vložili tožbo za razveljavitev naroka za prvo javno dražbo in za vrnitev v prvotno stanje v izvršilni zadevi, ki je tekla pred Okrajnim sodiščem na Jesenicah. Okrajno sodišče na Jesenicah v predlogu za prenos pristojnosti meni, da je to razlog, ki utemeljuje prenos pristojnosti.

2. Predlog je utemeljen.

3. Po 67. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) lahko Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije na predlog stranke ali pristojnega sodišča 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. Delegacija pristojnosti je torej v prvi vrsti namenjena zagotavljanju smotrnosti, vendar je izjemoma, kot "drug tehten razlog", možna tudi, če je podan dvom v tako imenovano objektivno nepristranskost sodišča.

4. Dejstvo, da je predmet tožbe postopanje Okrajnega sodišča na Jesenicah, bi moglo negativno vplivati na percepcijo javnosti o objektivni nepristranskosti tega sodišča pri odločanju o obravnavani tožbi. Zato je Vrhovno sodišče predlogu ugodilo in za odločanje v zadevi določilo krajevno najbližje stvarno pristojno sodišče, tj. Okrajno sodišče v Radovljici.