Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 148/2008 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2008:I.R.148.2008 AI generated

Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction based solely on a general claim to a fair trial.

Case Number Sklep I R 148/2008
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 rejected a defendant's request to transfer the case to a different court. The defendant argued that the Piran District Court lacked jurisdiction and claimed a right to a fair trial, but offered no specific reasons why proceedings would be easier elsewhere. The court held that a general assertion of a fair trial right is insufficient to justify delegating jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure; A general claim to a fair trial cannot serve as the sole basis for transferring jurisdiction to another court without concrete evidence of procedural efficiency or other significant reasons.

Keywords

AI generated
transfer of jurisdiction fair trial right code of civil procedure delegation of authority procedural efficiency district court competence supreme court review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPP)
AI generated
Sklep I R 78/2005
Court rejects transfer of venue based solely on complainant's dissatisfaction with specific judges.
VSRS sklep I R 150/2014
Supreme Court rejects debtor's request to delegate jurisdiction due to procedural delays, citing lack of objective impartiality grounds.
VSRS Sklep I R 55/2023
Appeal dismissed because a judge testifying as a witness does not compromise court impartiality.
VSRS Sklep III R 24/2022
Supreme Court rejects transfer of jurisdiction request based on alleged judicial bias and lack of natural judge rights.
VSRS Sklep I R 48/2019
Supreme Court orders transfer of case to ensure objective impartiality when judge is spouse of opposing party.

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

Predlog se zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Pavšalna trditev, da ima toženec pravico do poštenega sojenja, ne more biti podlaga za delegacijo pristojnosti.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

V pravdni zadevi Okrajnega sodišča v Piranu P 189/2005 je toženec na naroku dne 13.11.2008 predlagal določitev drugega sodišča, kjer ni pristojno Višje sodišče v Kopru. Navedel je, da ima pravico do poštenega sojenja.

Predlog ni utemeljen.

Po 67. členu Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP, Uradni list RS št. 26/99 s spremembami in dopolnitvami) lahko Vrhovno sodišče na predlog stranke določi za postopanje drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, če je očitno, da se bo tako lažje opravil postopek, ali če so za to podani drugi tehtni razlogi.

V obravnavanem primeru tožnik ne trdi, da bi se postopek lažje opravil pri drugem sodišču, prav tako pa ne navaja nobenega tehtnega razloga za določitev drugega okrajnega sodišča namesto Okrajnega sodišča v Piranu. Trditev, da ima pravico do poštenega sojenja sicer drži, da pa mu tako sojenje ni zagotovljeno pri Okrajnem sodišču v Piranu, ni niti obrazloženo zatrjevano niti kakorkoli izkazano. Pavšalna trditev ne more biti podlaga za delegacijo pristojnosti. Zato Vrhovno sodišče zaključuje, da je toženčev predlog neutemeljen, kar je narekovalo njegovo zavrnitev.