Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 27/2001 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2001:I.R.27.2001 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers case to another court because a defendant works at the current court.

Case Number Sklep I R 27/2001
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 the Republic of Slovenia designated the District Court in Škofja Loka to handle the proceedings instead of the District Court in Kranj. The lower court argued that the second defendant, employed as a technical assistant at the Kranj court, could create doubts about impartiality. The Supreme Court agreed that this employment relationship could influence the course of the trial and thus approved the transfer.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

67. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku; The employment of a party at the court conducting the proceedings may create reasonable doubt regarding judicial impartiality, warranting the transfer of the case to a different court.

Keywords

AI generated
judicial impartiality court employment case transfer procedural objection Zakon o pravdnem postopku

Cited Legislation

AI generated
67. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
Sklep I R 29/95
Supreme Court delegates case to Radovljica District Court for procedural efficiency under ZPP Art. 68.
Sklep I R 110/2006
Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court due to employee's employment there affecting public perception of neutrality.
Sklep I R 46/2001
Supreme Court transfers enforcement case to Radovljica court due to creditor's employment at Kranj court.
Sklep I R 25/2009
Supreme Court transfers case to another district court due to judge's father being the defendant.
VSRS Sklep I R 181/2021
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction based on convenience, upholding the plaintiff's choice of court for joint defendants.

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 Škofji Loki.

[JEDRO]

Dejstvo, da je druga toženka zaposlena pri sodišču, ki vodi postopek, lahko moteče vpliva na potek postopka.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Pri Okrajnem sodišču v Kranju teče pravda opr. št. P 677/98 tožeče stranke A. A. proti tožencema B. in C. D. zaradi plačila 165.124,98 SIT.

Okrajno sodišče v Kranju predlaga, da Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije določi, da v zadevi postopa drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, ker je druga toženka C. D. zaposlena pri tem sodišču kot strokovna sodelavka, kar bi pri nasprotni stranki lahko povzročilo dvom v nepristranost sojenja.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Dejstvo, da je druga toženka zaposlena pri sodišču, ki vodi postopek, lahko moteče vpliva na potek postopka. Zato je Vrhovno sodišče na podlagi 67. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku odločilo, da bo v tej zadevi postopalo Okrajno sodišče v Škofji Loki kot bližnje stvarno pristojno sodišče.