Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 36/2002 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2002:I.R.36.2002 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers case to Nov Mesto District Court due to judge's conflict of interest as guardian.

Case Number Sklep I R 36/2002
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 the proceedings from the original district court to the District Court in Nov Mesto. The original court president argued that the presiding judge was the legal guardian of the minor plaintiff, creating a potential conflict of interest. The Supreme Court agreed that this circumstance constitutes a significant reason under Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act, necessitating a transfer to ensure impartiality.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act; A judge serving as the legal guardian of a party creates a significant risk of bias, justifying the transfer of proceedings to a different court to ensure impartiality.

Keywords

AI generated
legal guardian conflict of interest impartiality transfer of proceedings minor plaintiff Civil Procedure Act judicial bias

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
Sklep I R 63/2001
Supreme Court transfers divorce case to another district court due to judge's conflict of interest.
Sklep I R 51/2003
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses transfer of jurisdiction request based solely on judge-relative relationship.
Sklep I R 42/2008
Supreme Court delegates jurisdiction to Jesenices District Court due to apparent bias of Radovljica Court against a judge sitting there.
VSRS Sklep I R 3/2025
Supreme Court transfers case jurisdiction due to clerk's familial tie to opposing party causing impartiality doubts.
Sklep I R 87/2005
Doubt about judges' impartiality grounds for recusal, not for transferring jurisdiction to another court.

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 Novem mestu.

[JEDRO]

Okoliščina, da je sodnica stvarno in krajevno pristojnega sodišča rejnica mladoletne tožnice, lahko moteče vpliva na postopek. Gre za tehten razlog, kakršnega ima v mislih 67. člen ZPP.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Pri Okrajnem sodišču v ... teče pod opr. št. P 97/2000 pravdni postopek ml. M. S. zoper Zavarovalnico Triglav d.d. zaradi plačila odškodnine. Predsednica sodišča v predlogu za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča navaja, da sta sodnica tega sodišča ... in njen mož rejnika mladoletne tožnice. To je okoliščina, ki bi pri nasprotni stranki utegnila povzročiti dvom v nepristranost sodišča pri sojenju v tej zadevi.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Okoliščina, da je sodnica stvarno in krajevno pristojnega sodišča rejnica mladoletne tožnice, lahko moteče vpliva na postopek. Gre za tehten razlog, kakršnega ima v mislih 67. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku. Zato je Vrhovno sodišče predlogu ugodilo in določilo za postopanje Okrajno sodišče v Novem mestu kot bližnje večje sodišče.