Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 14/2001 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2001:I.R.14.2001 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers civil case to another court due to judge plaintiff's daily contact with original court judges.

Case Number Sklep I R 14/2001
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 a civil case from the original court to the Court in Celje upon the presiding judge's request. The plaintiff, who is a judge at the original court, argued that his daily interactions with the local judges created a reasonable doubt about the court's impartiality. The Supreme Court agreed, ruling that such circumstances constitute a valid ground for transferring jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure; The Supreme Court may transfer a case to another competent court upon request if there are weighty reasons, such as the plaintiff being a judge at the original court who has daily contact with its judges, thereby creating a reasonable doubt about impartiality.

Keywords

AI generated
Code of Civil Procedure transfer of jurisdiction judge as plaintiff impartiality doubt reasonable doubt weighty reasons procedural transfer

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
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 29/95
Supreme Court delegates case to Radovljica District Court for procedural efficiency under ZPP Art. 68.
VSRS Sklep I R 148/2021
Supreme Court transfers civil case jurisdiction to Domžale due to defendant's relationship with Ljubljane judge.
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 39/2005
Supreme Court transfers case to another court due to employee's employment at the original court causing perceived bias.

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 Celju.

[JEDRO]

Dejstvo, da je tožnik sodnik in da je v vsakodnevnih stikih s sodniki Okrajnega sodišča v ..., je za postopek moteča okoliščina, ki bi utegnila vzbuditi dvom o nepristranskosti sodišča.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Pri Okrajnem sodišču v ... teče pod opr. št. P 313/2001 pravdni postopek tožnika P. P. proti toženki J. P. Predsednica Okrajnega sodišča v ... predlaga, da Vrhovno sodišče na podlagi 67. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku določi krajevno pristojnost drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča, ker je tožnik sodnik Okrožnega sodišča v ... Sodniki obeh sodišč so v vsakodnevnih stikih. To bi pri toženki in v javnosti utegnilo vzbuditi dvom v nepristranost sodišča.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Po 67. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku lahko vrhovno sodišče na predlog pristojnega sodišča določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, da postopa v zadevi, če so za to dani tehtni razlogi. Dejstvo, da je tožnik sodnik in da je v vsakodnevnih stikih s sodniki Okrajnega sodišča v ..., je za postopek moteča okoliščina, ki bi utegnila vzbuditi dvom o nepristranskosti sodišča. Da se tak dvom odpravi, je Vrhovno sodišče predlogu ugodilo in določilo Okrajno sodišče v Celje, kot bližnje sodišče, da izpelje postopek v tej zadevi.