Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep II Ips 363/2004 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2004:II.IPS.363.2004 AI generated

Court dismisses appeal withdrawal case where defendant withdrew appeal before second instance judgment.

Case Number Sklep II Ips 363/2004
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court ruled that the opposing party withdrew their appeal before the second-instance court issued a decision. The defendant filed an appeal on February 26, 2004, but subsequently withdrew it via a request dated November 24, 2004. Since the withdrawal occurred before any judicial ruling on the appeal, the court applied procedural rules regarding appeal withdrawal to dismiss the matter.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

ZPP 383. člen; ZNP 37. člen: An appeal may be withdrawn by the party at any time before the second-instance court issues a decision, rendering the appeal inadmissible if withdrawn prior to judgment.

Keywords

AI generated
appeal withdrawal second instance procedure civil procedural law inadmissible appeal party withdrawal right

Cited Legislation

AI generated
383. člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP)
37. člen Zakona o nepravdnem postopku (ZNP)
AI generated
Sklep II Ips 948/93
Supreme Court dismisses appeal as unfounded because land registry document was submitted earlier than claimed.
Sklep II Ips 242/93
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on renewal of proceedings due to witness already summoned previously. The court rejects the claim that the witness's non-appearance constitutes new evidence. The appeal is rejected because the witness was already summoned in prior proceedings. The court finds the appeal unfounded as the witness was previously summoned and did not respond. The court rejects the appeal as the witness was already summoned in prior proceedings. The court dismisses the appeal because the witness was previously summoned and absent. The appeal is dismissed as the witness was already summoned in prior proceedings. The court rejects the appeal on grounds of the witness's prior summons and absence. The appeal is dismissed because the witness was already summoned in prior proceedings. The court rejects the appeal as the witness was previously summoned and did not appear.
Sklep II Ips 280/95
Supreme Court dismisses revision rejecting renewal request based on unknown facts or evidence assessment disagreement.
Sklep II Ips 410/96
Appeal dismissed; admissibility of new expert evidence depends on whether it could have been proposed earlier.
VSL Sklep I Cp 2361/2017
Appeal dismissed; applicants failed to prove timely filing of motion to reopen proceedings under ZPP.

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

Ugotovi se, da je nasprotna udeleženka umaknila revizijo.

[JEDRO]

Po določbi 383. člena ZPP v zvezi s 37. členom ZNP veljajo v postopku z revizijo smiselno določbe ZPP o pritožbi, med drugim tudi določba drugega odstavka 334. člena istega zakona.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

O predlogu predlagateljev za vrnitev zaplenjenega premoženja je bilo pravnomočno odločeno tako, kot je to razvidno iz izreka sklepa sodišča druge stopnje.

Zoper sklep sodišča druge stopnje je nasprotna udeleženka 26.2.2004 vložila revizijo, ki je bila s spisom predložena revizijskemu sodišču 22.6.2004, vendar je nato z vlogo z dne 24.11.2004 sporočila, da umika v tem postopku vloženo revizijo.

Po določbi 383. člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP, Ur. l. RS, št. 36/2004 - uradno prečiščeno besedilo) v zvezi s 37. členom Zakona o nepravdnem postopku (ZNP) veljajo v postopku z revizijo smiselno določbe ZPP o pritožbi, med drugim tudi določba drugega odstavka 334. člena istega zakona. Po njej lahko stranka umakne že vloženo pritožbo, dokler sodišče druge stopnje ne izda odločbe. Ker je v obravnavani zadevi nasprotna udeleženka z vlogo z dne 24.11.2004 umaknila revizijo in ker dotlej revizijsko sodišče o njeni reviziji še ni odločalo, je bilo treba na podlagi navedenih zakonskih določb odločiti, kot je to razvidno iz izreka tega sklepa.