izpis_h1_title_alt

Pritožbeni razlogi v pravdnem postopku
ID Janežič, Andraž (Author), ID Kramberger Škerl, Jerca (Mentor) More about this mentor... This link opens in a new window

.pdfPDF - Presentation file, Download (1,01 MB)
MD5: B934B8F2A65CD62A865BE7716BCEF722
PID: 20.500.12556/rul/e7010721-b01f-43dd-86c8-45bf31c39888

Abstract
Pritožba je kritika dela sodišča na poti do izdaje prvostopenjske sodne odločbe. To pravno sredstvo je pri nas ustavna pravica in zakonodajalec mora ob zagotavljanju pravice do pritožbe opredeliti tudi pritožbene razloge. Pritožba se lahko osredotoči na napake postopka (errores in procedendo) ali vsebinske napake sodbe (errores in iudicando). Ker je slednja sklep pravnega silogizma, se pritožba lahko nanaša na obe premisi, iz katerih je izpeljan, to je na napake pri uporabi materialnega prava (errores iuris) ali na napake pri ugotovitvi dejanskega stanja (errores facti). Iz navedenega izhaja delitev pritožbenih razlogov v tri skupine: bistvene kršitve določb pravdnega postopka (podrobno jih razdelimo še na relativne in absolutne), zmotno in nepopolno ugotovljeno dejansko stanje ter nepravilno uporabo materialnega prava. Del tega magistrskega dela se osredotoča na lastnosti posameznih pritožbenih razlogov. Zakon o pravdnem postopku določa, da nekatere absolutno bistvene kršitve in nepravilno uporabo materialnega prava pritožbeno sodišče ugotavlja po uradni dolžnosti, ostale bistvene kršitve določb pravdnega postopka ter zmotno in nepopolno ugotovljeno dejansko stanje pa le na predlog. Na podlagi slednjega je izjemnega pomena, da znajo tako stranke kot sodišča vselej razlikovati med pritožbenimi razlogi. Obenem pa morajo stranke, vsaj kadar se pritožujejo iz pritožbenega razloga, ki ga sodišče preverja le na predlog, za uspeh v postopku konkretizirano in argumentirano obrazložiti pritožbo. V magistrskem delu nekaj pozornosti tako namenjam tudi razmejitvi pritožbenih razlogov.

Language:Slovenian
Keywords:civilno procesno pravo, pravdni postopek, pravna sredstva, pritožba, pritožbeni razlogi
Work type:Master's thesis/paper
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Year:2017
PID:20.500.12556/RUL-95419 This link opens in a new window
COBISS.SI-ID:15779409 This link opens in a new window
Publication date in RUL:20.09.2017
Views:4112
Downloads:700
Metadata:XML RDF-CHPDL DC-XML DC-RDF
:
Copy citation
Share:Bookmark and Share

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:The Reasons for Appeal in Contentious Civil Procedure.
Abstract:
An appeal is a critique of first instance court´s work all the way until its final decision. In Slovenian legal order, appeal is a constitutional right, the enforcement of which obliges the legislator to also define reasons for appeal. It can be concentrated either on procedural (errores in procedendo) or substantive errors (errores in iudicando) of the judgement. As the latter results from the so called judicial syllogism, an appeal can refer to both premises from which the court´s conclusion originates, either the errors in applying substantive law (errores iuris), or the errors in ascertaining the facts of the dispute (errores facti). Therefore, the reasons for appeal are divided into three groups: severe violations of the procedural rules (divided into the so called absolute and relative violations), wrongly or incompletely ascertained facts of the dispute and the incorrect applicability of substantive law. A part of this thesis concentrates on the characteristics of the individual reasons for appeal. Slovenian Civil Procedure Act provides for the appellate courts to establish the existence of certain absolute procedural violations and the incorrect applicability of substantive law on their own motion. Other procedural violations and wrongly or incompletely ascertained facts of the dispute are to be established by court only if invoked by the appellant. The latter suggests the utmost importance for both parties, as well as the appellate court to understand the distinction among the different reasons for appeal. Namely, the appellant must, when invoking a reason for appeal that the court does not control on its own motion, explain and substantiate the existence of such reason. Therefore, this thesis also deals with the differentiation of the reasons for appeal, as well as the required argumentation in the appeal.

Keywords:civil procedure, contentious procedure, appeal, reasons for appeal, legal remedy, &#8195

Similar documents

Similar works from RUL:
Similar works from other Slovenian collections:

Back