Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
Sklep II DoR 10/2009 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2009:II.DOR.10.2009 KI-generiert

Supreme Court dismisses review application because procedural conditions under the Civil Procedure Act are not met.

Geschäftsnummer Sklep II DoR 10/2009
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Slowenien (SI)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Supreme Court of Slovenia rejected the applicant's request to permit a review of the second-instance judgment. The applicant had previously lost a claim for damages compensation, and the review application failed to satisfy the statutory requirements for admissibility. Consequently, the court applied the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Act to deny the procedural request.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

367.a(1) C.P.P.; 367.c(2) C.P.P.: A review application is inadmissible if the conditions for its permission under the first paragraph of Article 367a of the Civil Procedure Act are not fulfilled.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
review application admissibility conditions Civil Procedure Act damages compensation second instance judgment Revisionsgründe Revision des Raumplans Rückverweisung

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
367.a(1) of the Civil Procedure Act
367.c(2) of the Civil Procedure Act
KI-generiert
Sodba II Ips 236/2001
Supreme Court dismisses state employee's intentional tort claim against Ministry official for damages.
Sodba II Ips 330/2001
Swimming pool manager not liable for third party assault unless prior knowledge or foreseeability is proven.
VSRS sklep II DoR 191/2015
Supreme Court dismisses late appeal permission request due to improper service acceptance by lawyer.
Sodba II Ips 742/2009
Court dismisses appeal in traffic accident case, upholding 70% liability for drunk driver despite police car errors.
VSL Sodba I Cpg 931/2017
Appeal dismissed; State Review Commission correctly applied ZJN-2 Art. 78(4) without exceeding statutory authority.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

Predlog se zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Ker pogoji za dopustitev revizije niso podani, je Vrhovno sodišče predlog zavrnilo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Tožnik je vložil predlog za dopustitev revizije zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje, s katero je bila zavrnjena njegova pritožba zoper sodbo sodišča prve stopnje o zavrnitvi zahtevka za plačilo odškodnine.

2. Ker pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku niso podani, je Vrhovno sodišče predlog zavrnilo (drugi odstavek 367.c člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku).