Legislator Case Law & Legislation
Sklep I R 65/2004 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2004:I.R.65.2004 AI generated

Supreme Court transfers divorce property case to Maribor court due to procedural efficiency and accessibility.

Case Number Sklep I R 65/2004
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia ordered the transfer of a divorce property dispute from the court in Slovenska Bistrica to the court in Maribor. The defendant argued that the plaintiff, a paraplegic requiring two assistants, would face significant difficulty traveling to the higher court, whereas Maribor has an elevator allowing her to attend with just one helper. The court found the defendant's argument reasonable and granted the transfer to ensure the proceedings could be conducted more easily.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure; The Supreme Court may transfer a case to another competent court upon a party's request if it is evident that the proceedings would be conducted more easily or if other significant reasons exist, such as the physical accessibility of the venue for a party.

Keywords

AI generated
civil procedure transfer of jurisdiction procedural efficiency accessibility divorce property dispute supreme court competent court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 67 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated

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 nepravdni zadevi se določi Okrajno sodišče v Mariboru.

[JEDRO]

Prenos na drugo sodišče iz razlogov smotrnosti.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Pred Okrajnim sodiščem v Slovenski Bistrici je v teku nepravdni postopek zaradi razdružitve skupnega premoženja po predlogu predlagateljice V. P. proti nasprotnemu udeležencu Vo. P. Ta pa je podal predlog za prenos pristojnosti na stvarno pristojno Okrajno sodišče v Mariboru. Predlog utemeljuje s tem, da je paraplegik in da potrebuje dva močna moška, da ga preneseta v prvo nadstropje sodišča, medtem ko je na sodišču v Mariboru dvigalo in tako potrebuje pomoč le ene osebe.

Predlog je utemeljen.

Po določbi 67. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku lahko vrhovno sodišče na predlog stranke določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče, da postopa v zadevi, če je očitno, da se bo tako laže opravil postopek, ali če so za to drugi tehtni razlogi. Med razloge za smotrno delegacijo spadajo tudi okoliščine, ki jih je tožena stranka navedla v svojem predlogu. Po drugi strani pa za predlagateljico in njeno pooblaščenko prenos pristojnosti na bližnje sodišče v Maribor ne bo otežkočil njune udeležbe v postopku. Predlogu je bilo zato treba ugoditi.