20.500.12556/DKUM-91976 Standard obrazloženosti odgovora na tožbo v primerjavi s standardom obrazloženosti ugovora zoper sklep o izvršbi izdan na podlagi verodostojne listine magistrsko delo Standard of justification for a statement of defense against lawsuit compared to the standard of justification for an objection against the writ of execution issued on the basis of a credible document Odgovor na tožbo in ugovor zoper sklep o izvršbi na podlagi verodostojne listine sta pravna instituta, ki omogočata tožencu v pravdnem in dolžniku v izvršilnem postopku, da se učinkovito branita pred zahtevki nasprotne stranke. Njuna temeljna funkcija je zagotoviti pravično procesno ravnotežje tekom postopka. Oba instituta strankam zagotavljata pravico do obrambe in temeljita na ustavno zagotovljeni pravici do izjave kot sestavnem delu pravice do sodnega varstva. Ključna razlika med njima se kaže v zahtevanem standardu obrazloženosti, ki vpliva na učinkovitost procesne obrambe in varstvo pravic strank. V teoriji in praksi je vprašanje obrazloženosti ključnega pomena, saj ima pomemben vpliv na uspešnost procesne obrambe in zaščite pravic strank postopka. V pravdnem postopku ima toženec možnost skozi celoten postopek dopolnjevati svojo obrambo, saj se pravica do izjave zagotavlja pred izdajo meritorne sodne odločbe. Nasprotno pa mora dolžnik v izvršilnem postopku že ob vložitvi ugovora zoper sklep o izvršbi izdan na podlagi verodostojne listine podati ustrezno obrazložene in materialnopravno relevantne navedbe, sicer sodišče ugovor zavrne. To pomeni, da ima dolžnik bistveno manj manevrskega prostora pri svoji obrambi kot toženec v pravdi. The statement of defence and the objection against a writ of execution based on credible document are legal instruments that allow the defendant in civil proceedings and the debtor in enforcement proceedings to effectively defend themselves against the claims of the opposing party. Their fundamental function is to ensure procedural balance and provide the parties with an adequate opportunity to protect their rights. Both instruments guarantee the right to defence and are based on the constitutionally guaranteed right to be heard as an integral part of the right to judicial protection. The key difference between them lies in the required standard of justification, which affects the effectiveness of procedural defence and the protection of the parties’ rights. In both legal theory and practice, the issue of justification is crucial, as it significantly influences the success of procedural defence and the safeguarding of rights. In civil proceedings, the defendant has the opportunity to continuously refine their defence throughout the process, as the right to be heard is ensured before a substantive court decision is issued. In contrast, in enforcement proceedings, the debtor must already provide sufficiently reasoned and legally relevant objections when filing an objection against writ of execution based on credible document; otherwise, the court will reject it. This means that the debtor has significantly less room to manoeuvre in their defence compared to the defendant in civil proceedings. tožba sklep o izvršbi verodostojna listina obrazloženost plačilni nalog spor majhne vrednosti zamudna sodba lawsuit writ of execution credible document justification payment order small claims dispute default judgment true true false B. Toplak Slovenski jezik Angleški jezik Magistrsko delo/naloga 2025-03-10 08:43:03 2025-05-19 12:17:56 2025-05-20 03:15:20 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2025 0 Maribor 0 Maribor 1 spletni vir (1 datoteka PDF (III, 47 str.)) 0000-00-00 NiDoloceno NiDoloceno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 347.952(043.3) 236343299 MAG_Toplak_Barbara_2025.pdf MAG_Toplak_Barbara_2025.pdf 1 804C73D2ED6ADDE2F5D147C109225276 b7d6a479f62f6d7101b65f6a6bb1a94a5518011780a5a1eb9cf28e448a98b852 7eb99df2-031a-11f0-895f-00155d000105 https://dk.um.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=189411 Pravna fakulteta 0 0 0