Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep VIII DoR 12/2009-5 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:VIII.DOR.12.2009.5 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses appeal permission request as no conditions for review under ZPP Art. 367a exist.

Case Number Sklep VIII DoR 12/2009-5
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 applicant's request to permit an appeal against a final labor court judgment. The applicant sought compensation for lost work rights due to shortened working hours, but the lower courts upheld the dismissal of this claim. The Supreme Court found that the statutory conditions for allowing a review under Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act were not met.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act; A review appeal is not permitted when the applicant fails to demonstrate that the lower court's decision was based on a violation of law or a significant error in fact-finding.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act review appeal shortened working hours lost work rights labor compensation final judgment Supreme Court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
Sodba VIII Ips 196/2004
Supreme Court partially allows unemployment benefit claim for business owner seeking new employment under ZPIZ.
VDSS sodba Psp 372/2008
Appeal allowed; change in disability status terminated waiting unemployment benefit entitlement under ZPIZ.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 913/2018
Appeal dismissed; employer liable for seniority bonus from filing date due to statutory default rule.
VDS sodba Psp 577/2007
Court allows appeal, quashing administrative decision for failing to distinguish new claim from final ruling.
VDS sodba in sklep Pdp 60/2001
Court partially allows appeal on monthly wage minimums and travel expenses in labor dispute.

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]

Na podlagi navedb tožnika v predlogu za dopustitev revizije Vrhovno sodišče ugotavlja, da ne obstajajo pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz 367.a člena ZPP.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek tožnika, da mu je tožena stranka dolžna plačati prikrajšanje iz naslova priznanja pravice do dela v skrajšanem delovnem času za čas od 1. 2. 2001 do 7. 11. 2006 v znesku 23.113,58 EUR s pripadajočimi zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 18. 11. 2006 do plačila. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožene stranke zavrnilo in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje.

2. Na podlagi navedb tožnika v predlogu za dopustitev revizije zoper pravnomočno sodbo sodišča druge stopnje, Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije ugotavlja, da ne obstajajo pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz 367.a člena ZPP.