Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 19/2001 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2001:I.R.19.2001 AI generated

Court dismisses case and transfers jurisdiction to Celje because plaintiff is court clerk at Žalec court.

Case Number Sklep I R 19/2001
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 dismissed the case and designated the District Court in Celje as the competent court for trial. The plaintiff, a court clerk employed at the District Court in Žalec, sued for a debt of 265,265.00 SIT, prompting the Žalec court to request a transfer of jurisdiction. The court ruled that the plaintiff's employment at the original court constituted a significant reason under the Civil Procedure Act to designate a different competent court.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act; The court may designate a different competent court when the plaintiff is an employee of the original court, as this constitutes a significant reason for jurisdictional transfer.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act jurisdiction transfer court clerk employment significant reason competent court designation employee of court procedural transfer

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act (1999)
AI generated
Sklep I R 54/2004
Slovenian Supreme Court allows transfer of jurisdiction due to employee at local court raising impartiality doubts.
Sklep I R 138/2002
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction due to judge's employment location in another district court.
Sklep I R 3/2002
Supreme Court transfers case to another court due to plaintiff's employment at the original court.
Sklep I R 96/2007
Supreme Court allows transfer of case to another court to ensure appearance of impartiality when defendant works there.
Sklep I R 25/2009
Supreme Court transfers case to another district court due to judge's father being the defendant.

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 sojenje v tej zadevi se določi Okrajno sodišče v Celju.

[JEDRO]

Pravdna stranka je sodna zapisnikarica na pristojnem sodišču.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožeča stranka je proti toženi stranki vložila pri Okrajnem sodišču v Žalcu tožbo zaradi plačila zneska 265.265,00 SIT.

Okrajno sodišče v Žalcu je dne 23.3.2001 podalo predlog za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča, ker je tožeča stranka sodna zapisnikarica pri omenjenem sodišču.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Po določbi 67. člena ZPP (Zakona o pravdnem postopku - 1999) lahko vrhovno sodišče na predlog pristojnega sodišča določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, da postopa v zadevi, če za to obstoje tehtni razlogi. V predlogu navedena okoliščina, da je tožnica sodna zapisnikarica pri stvarno in krajevno pristojnem sodišču je tehten razlog za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča. Zato je odločeno, kot izhaja iz izreka sklepa.