Appeal rejected because the disputed amount in the final judgment did not exceed 1 million SIT. The court dismissed the review due to the statutory threshold for appeals in property disputes. The review was inadmissible as the value of the rejected claim remained below the limit. The court applied the rule that only the main claim's value counts for appeal eligibility. The decision upheld the lower court's partial rejection of the appeal. The review was dismissed because the value of the rejected claim did not exceed the statutory limit. The court held that the appeal was inadmissible as the disputed amount was under 1 million SIT. The review was rejected because the value of the rejected claim did not exceed the statutory threshold. The court dismissed the appeal as the disputed amount was below the required 1 million SIT limit. The review was inadmissible because the value of the rejected claim did not exceed the statutory limit.
Slovenia (SI)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court of Slovenia dismissed the applicant's review against the appellate court's decision. The applicant sought to challenge the portion of the judgment rejecting the main claim of 450,000 SIT and interest, arguing it was insufficiently addressed. The court ruled that the review was inadmissible because the value of this rejected portion did not exceed the statutory threshold of 1,000,000 SIT for property disputes. Consequently, the review was rejected based on the specific provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure regarding appeal value limits.
Legislator headnote
AI generated2nd paragraph, section 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure; 1st paragraph, section 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure: In property disputes, a review is admissible only if the value of the disputed part of the final judgment exceeds 1,000,000 SIT, and the value is determined solely by the main claim.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedFull text
Revizija se zavrže.
[JEDRO]
Tožnikova revizija v premoženjskem sporu ni dovoljena, če vrednost v zvezi s pravnomočno zavrnilno sodbo ne presega 1.000.000 SIT.
[OBRAZLOŽITEV]
Sodišče prve stopnje je izdalo naslednjo sodbo:
"Tožena stranka je dolžna plačati tožniku 811.685,00 SIT z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi:
- od 361.685,00 SIT od 13.4.2001 do plačila
- od 450.000,00 SIT od izdaje sodbe do plačila, ter povrniti tožeči stranki pravdne stroške v znesku 271.052,00 SIT z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 98.088,00 SIT od 3.4.2001, od 15.000,00 SIT od 24.10.2001, od ostalih pravdnih stroškov od izdaje sodbe do plačila, vse v 15 dneh, da ne bo izvršbe.
V presežku za obresti od 450.000,00 SIT za čas od 23.12.1997 do 24.10.2001, za znesek 450.000,00 SIT z obrestmi od 23.12.1997 do plačila, za obresti od 361.685,00 SIT od 14.4.1997 do 13.4.2001 in za znesek 7.404,00 SIT z obrestmi od 14.4.1997 do plačila, se tožbeni zahtevek zavrne."
Pritožbeno sodišče je delno ugodilo pritožbi tožeče stranke in spremenilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje glede zamudnih obresti. V preostalem delu je zavrnilo pritožbi pravdnih strank.
Tožnik je vložil revizijo proti sodbi pritožbenega sodišča v zavrnilnem delu.
Revizija ni dovoljena.
V premoženjskih sporih je revizija dovoljena, če vrednost izpodbijanega dela pravnomočne sodbe presega 1,000.000 tolarjev (2. odstavek 367. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku - ZPP). Če je za ugotovitev pravice do revizije odločilna vrednost spornega predmeta, se vzame kot vrednost spornega predmeta samo vrednost glavnega zahtevka (1. odstavek 39. člena ZPP). Sodišče prve stopnje je s sodbo zavrnilo tožbeni zahtevek glede glavnice 450.000 SIT in 7.404 SIT. Pritožbeno sodišče je zato v okviru odločanja o tožnikovi pritožbi proti sodbi sodišča prve stopnje, odločilo le o glavnici v navedenem obsegu. Izpodbijani del pravnomočne sodbe tako ne presega 1,000.000 SIT in zato revizija ni dovoljena. Vrhovno sodišče je zato zavrglo revizijo na podlagi 377. člena ZPP.