Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 60/2001 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2001:I.R.60.2001 AI generated

Court transfers possession disturbance case to another court due to plaintiff's clerk employment at original court.

Case Number Sklep I R 60/2001
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 possession disturbance case from the original district court to the district court in Grosuplje. The plaintiff, a court clerk employed at the original court, requested a transfer, which the presiding judge supported. The court ruled that the plaintiff's employment at the original court constituted a significant reason 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 the original court's proposal if significant reasons exist, such as the plaintiff's employment at the original court creating a conflict of interest.

Keywords

AI generated
possession disturbance jurisdiction transfer court clerk employment conflict of interest Code of Civil Procedure significant reasons Slovenian law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure (1999)
AI generated
Sklep I R 62/97
Supreme Court transfers case to another court because the defendant is a judge at the original court.
VSRS Sklep I R 23/2016
Supreme Court transfers jurisdiction to Maribor due to the presiding judge being a party to the lawsuit.
Sklep I R 44/2009
Supreme Court delegates case to another court because a party is a judge at the original court.
Sklep I R 26/97
Court transfers possession dispute to another court due to conflict of interest involving a court employee.
Sklep I R 13/2005
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction due to alleged bias as insufficient grounds under ZPP Art. 67.

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 postopanje v tej zadevi se določi Okrajno sodišče v Grosupljem.

[JEDRO]

Dejstvo, da je tožnica zapisnikarica na pristojnem sodišču je tehten razlog za prenos pristojnosti na drugo sodišče.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožeča stranka je pri Okrajnem sodišču v ... vložila tožbo proti tožencem zaradi motenja posesti.

Predsednica Okrajnega sodišča v ... pa je dne 06.09.2001 predlagala, naj vrhovno sodišče določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče v državi, ker je tožnica zaposlena kot strojepiska - zapisnikarica na pravdnem oddelku Okrajnega sodišča v ....

Predlog je utemeljen.

Po določbi 67. člena ZPP (Zakona o pravdnem postopku - 1999) vrhovno sodišče na predlog pristojnega sodišča lahko določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, da postopa v zadevi, če so, med drugim, za to podani tehtni razlogi. Okoliščina, da je tožnica zapisnikarica -

strojepiska na pravdnem oddelku stvarno in krajevno pristojnega sodišča, je dejstvo takšne narave, da predstavlja tehten razlog za delegacijo pristojnosti na drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče. Zato je predlogu predsednice Okrajnega sodišča v ... ugodeno, zadeva pa je odstopljena v postopanje Okrajnemu sodišču v Grosupljem.