Novosti revizije po noveli ZPP-E

Ruhitel, Maja

| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

First page > Show document

Show document

Title:	Novosti revizije po noveli ZPP-E
Authors:	ID Ruhitel, Maja (Author) ID Ivanc, Tjaša (Mentor) More about this mentor...
Files:	MAG_Ruhitel_Maja_2017.pdf (743,34 KB) MD5: 6BE3CB75F9AFA59FBBFE257FAB0096F1 PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/c505f96f-fe34-4239-8222-00afa9e42cec
Language:	Slovenian
Work type:	Master's thesis/paper
Typology:	2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:	PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:	Glavna sprememba revizije po Zakonu o spremembah in dopolnitvah zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP-E, v nadaljevanju: novela ZPP-E) je ukinitev dovoljene revizije oziroma ukinitev vrednostnega kriterija, ki je avtomatsko pomenil dostop na vrhovno sodišče. S tem smo zavzeli bolj povezan in celosten pristop k obravnavanju zadev, kjer je edini kriterij dopuščene revizije pomembnost pravnega vprašanja, ki je obenem pomembno za zagotovitev pravne varnosti, enotne uporabe prava ali razvoj prava preko sodne prakse. Pravila postopka so temu primerno spremenjena, sicer pa tek postopka ostaja bistveno enak. Novela ZPP-E je uvedla institut ločenih mnenj vrhovnih sodnikov, možnost javne obravnave na vrhovnem sodišču ter možnost javne razglasitve odločitve vrhovnega sodišča. Tudi razlogi za vložitev revizije so delno spremenjeni in določeni pregledneje. Opustitev vrednostnega kriterija pri postopku revizije ni novost v kontinentalnem sistemu, namreč Nemčija je tak pristop ubrala že več kot pred desetletjem. Tudi Ustavno sodišče RS se je že pred časom izreklo, da institut dovoljene revizije ne ustreza vlogi vrhovnega sodišča zato menim, da je bila taka sprememba pričakovana. Vrhovno sodišče je na tak način načeloma dobilo v roke »škarje in platno« v celoti, kajti zakon več ne določa, v katerih primerih je zadevo (ob izpolnjevanju še vseh ostalih predpostavk), zaradi vrednosti, nujno potrebno sprejeti v postopek obravnavanja. Učinke uvedbe ločenih mnenj in javne obravnave bo pokazal čas. Ločena mnenja sodnikov pripomorejo in stremijo k poglobljenemu študiju zadeve in možnosti popolne izjave sodnika v konkretnem primeru, uvajajo se pa po vzoru ločenih mnenj Ustavnega sodišča RS, medtem ko uvedba javnih obravnav prinaša neposredni stik s strankami. Tudi razlogi za vložitev revizije so rahlo spremenjeni oziroma poenostavljeni, kar je obenem prineslo tudi dobrodošlo nomotehnično, preglednejšo ureditev.
Keywords:	novela, dovoljena revizija, dopuščena revizija, vrhovno sodišče, izredno pravno sredstvo
Place of publishing:	[Maribor
Publisher:	M. Ruhitel]
Year of publishing:	2017
PID:	20.500.12556/DKUM-69231
UDC:	347.958(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:	5521707
NUK URN:	URN:SI:UM:DK:USIJY4OT
Publication date in DKUM:	03.01.2018
Views:	3882
Downloads:	602
Metadata:
Categories:	PF
:	Copy citation

Average score:	(0 votes)
Your score:	Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:

Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Licences

License:	CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Link:	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description:	The most restrictive Creative Commons license. This only allows people to download and share the work for no commercial gain and for no other purposes.
Licensing start date:	12.12.2017

Secondary language

Language:	English
Title:	The appeal on points of law by the amendment ZPP-E
Abstract:	The main change in the appeal on points of law under the act Zakon o spremembah in dopolnitvah zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP-E, hereinafter: the ZPP-E amendment) is the abolition of the allowed appeal on points of law and the abolition of a value criterion which automatically meant access to the Supreme Court. By doing so, we have taken a more connected and integrated approach to dealing with cases where the only criterion of the appeal on points of law is the importance of a legal issue, which is also important for ensuring legal certainty, uniform application of law or the development of law through case-law. The procedural rules have been modified accordingly, otherwise the process remains essentially the same. Novel ZPP-E introduced the institute of separate opinions of Supreme Judges, the possibility of public hearing in the Supreme Court and the possibility of public announcement of the decision of the Supreme Court. The reasons for submitting the appeal on points of law are also partially amended and specified more transparently. The abandonment of the value criterion in the process is not new in the continental system, but Germany has taken such an approach more than a decade ago. Even the Constitutional Court has already ruled some time ago that the institute of allowed appeal on points of law does not correspond to the role of the Supreme Court, therefore I believe that such a change was expected. In such a manner, the Supreme Court in principle received the "scissors and canvas" in its entirety, namely, the law will no longer determine (by value criterion) in which cases the case is absolutely necessary to be admitted to the procedure. The effects of introducing separate opinions and public hearing will show in time. Separate opinions of the judges help and strive for in-depth study of the case and the possibility of a full statement of the judge in the concrete case, and they are introduced along the lines of separate opinions of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, while the introduction of public hearings brings direct contact with the parties. The reasons for submitting the appeal of points of law are also slightly modified or simplified, which at the same time brought about a welcome nomotechnical and more transparent regulation.
Keywords:	amendment, appeal on points of law, leave to appeal on points of law, the Supreme Court, extraordinary legal remedy

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)

0 - 0 / 0

There are no comments!

Back