Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep I R 150/2002 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2003:I.R.150.2002 AI generated

Satisfaction with court rulings cannot serve as grounds for transferring jurisdiction under Article 67 of the ZPP.

Case Number Sklep I R 150/2002
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court rejected the debtor's request to transfer the enforcement case to another district court. The debtor argued that the presiding judge routinely dismisses complaints and explanations as untimely or unfounded, causing frustration. The court held that mere dissatisfaction with judicial decisions does not constitute a valid reason for jurisdictional transfer under Article 67 of the ZPP, as such grievances must be addressed through proper legal remedies.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the ZPP; Satisfaction with court rulings cannot serve as grounds for transferring jurisdiction to another court under Article 67 of the ZPP.

Keywords

AI generated
enforcement proceedings jurisdiction transfer Article 67 ZPP legal remedies court dissatisfaction procedural transfer supreme court ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the ZPP
AI generated
Sklep I R 90/2005
Supreme Court dismisses request to transfer jurisdiction after enforcement proceedings are legally final.
VSM sklep Cpg 258/95
Appeal allowed; execution request valid without enforceability certificate when filed at same court.
Sklep I R 64/99
Supreme Court rejects delegation of jurisdiction request based on unrelated procedural errors in prior proceedings.
VSK Sklep CDn 153/2023
Appeal dismissed; electronic land registry requires specific attachment of evidence documents for valid entry. Electronic land registry requires specific attachment of evidence documents for valid entry.
VSM sklep I Ip 1003/2012
Appeal dismissed; lease termination depends solely on agreed six-month period under OZ Art. 59(3).

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]

Nezadovoljstvo stranke z odločbami sodišča ne more predstavljati nobenega od razlogov iz 67. člena ZPP.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Dolžnik je v tej izvršilni zadevi po prejemu sklepa o zavrženju njegove prepozne pritožbe vložil predlog za prenos zadeve na drugo okrajno sodišče, ker očita sodnici, ki vodi ta izvršilni postopek, da k njej vsaka pritožba ali pojasnilo "prispe prepozno oziroma neutemeljeno" in se vsaka stvar zavrže.

Predlog ni utemeljen.

Vrhovno sodišče lahko na podlagi 67. člena ZPP na predlog stranke ali pristojnega sodišča določi, da v zadevi postopa drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, če je očitno, da se bo tako laže opravil postopek, ali če so za to drugi tehtni razlogi. Vrhovno sodišče ugotavlja, da okoliščine, ki jih uveljavlja dolžnik, niso razlogi iz 67. člena ZPP. Nezadovoljstvo stranke z odločbami sodišča ne more predstavljati nobenega od razlogov iz navedene zakonske določbe. Stranka lahko svoje nezadovoljstvo s sodno odločbo uveljavlja v za to predvidenem in določenem postopku, torej v postopku s pravnim sredstvom, kar je dolžnik v tej izvršilni zadevi tudi storil, vendar s pritožbo proti sklepu o zavrženju pritožbe ni uspel. Vrhovno sodišče je zato neutemeljen predlog za prenos pristojnosti zavrnilo.