Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
Sklep III R 3/2002 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2002:III.R.3.2002 Généré par l'IA

Former client's lawyer now being a judge in the case requires changing the competent court.

Numéro de cause Sklep III R 3/2002
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Slovénie (SI)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Partiellement admis (Partially Allowed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Supreme Court of Slovenia designated the District Court in Maribor as the competent court for the economic dispute. The respondent argued that the former client's lawyer now serves as a judge in the District Court of Slovenj Gradc, where the case was previously heard. The court ruled that this conflict of interest constitutes a significant reason to transfer jurisdiction, citing Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act; A former client's lawyer who now serves as a judge in a court hearing the same economic dispute constitutes a significant reason for determining a different competent court.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
conflict of interest competent court former client's lawyer judicial impartiality Civil Procedure Act jurisdiction transfer economic dispute protêt

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Article 67 of the Civil Procedure Act
Généré par l'IA
VSRS Sklep I R 41/2022
Supreme Court transfers case to another district court due to perceived lack of judicial impartiality.
Sklep I R 30/2002
Slovenian Supreme Court dismisses transfer request where client's relative is retired court employee.
Sklep III R 34/2007
Supreme Court rejects request for court transfer due to alleged bias, citing lack of legal basis and exhaustion of remedies.
Sklep I R 40/2001
Supreme Court transfers non-litigation case to nearest court due to judge's employment bias.
Sklep I R 40/97
Supreme Court transfers enforcement case to another court due to defendant's employment there creating a significant reason.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

Kot drugo krajevno pristojno sodišče za odločanje v sporu se določi Okrožno sodišče v Mariboru.

[JEDRO]

Dejstvo, da je bivši pooblaščenec tožene stranke sedaj sodnik sodišča, pred katerim teče zadevni gospodarski spor, je tehten razlog za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča. (To velja tudi, če bivši pooblaščenec v gospodarskem sporu ne sodi, temveč je na sodišču zgolj zaposlen kot eden od sodnikov.)

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Tožena stranka je predlagala, naj Vrhovno sodišče v gospodarskem sporu Pg 76/97, ki teče med njo in tožečo stranko, določi drugo stvarno pristojno sodišče. Navedla je, da je toženca v istem gospodarskem sporu že zastopal ..., ki je sedaj sodnik okrožnega sodišča v Slovenj Gradcu.

Predlog je utemeljen.

To, da je bivši pooblaščenec tožene stranke sedaj sodnik Okrožnega sodišča v Slovenj Gradcu in da pred tem sodiščem teče zadevni gospodarski spor, je tehten razlog za določitev drugega stvarno pristojnega sodišča (67. člen ZPP). Vrhovno sodišče je odločilo, da bo to Okrožno sodišče v Mariboru.