diplomsko delo
Karmen Preložnik (Author), Vesna Rijavec (Mentor)

Abstract

V zaključnem delu sem analizirala procesne probleme, ki nastanejo v postopkih glede ugotavljanja obsega in delitve skupnega premoženja med zakonci tako v nepravdnem kot v pravdnem postopku. Namreč, sam sodni postopek delitve skupnega premoženja se praviloma začne na nepravdnem sodišču, ki bo o delitvi skupnega premoženja odločalo le, če med zakoncema oz. udeležencema ni spora o predmetu delitve in o velikosti njunih deležev. Če pa med zakoncema ne bo dogovora o višini deležev na skupnem premoženju in bo podano nestrinjanje s pravno domnevo o enakosti deležev, bo nepravdno sodišče postopek prekinilo ter stranki napotilo na pravdo. Največ pozornosti sem namenila težavam pri povezavi med različnimi vrstami postopka. Sodna praksa že več desetletij pragmatično dopušča tudi neposredno vložitev tožbe za delitev skupnega premoženja. Bivša zakonca praviloma ne zahtevata delitve skupnega premoženja najprej v nepravdnem postopku, ampak kar v pravdnem postopku. Sodna praksa tudi šteje, da so z določitvijo deležev na skupnem premoženju že določeni tudi solastninski deleži na vseh stvareh, ki spadajo v skupno premoženje. Sodišča tudi dovoljujejo, da udeleženci že v pravdnih postopkih z zahtevki za izstavitev zemljiškoknjižnih listin in zahtevki za izplačilo protivrednosti solastninskega deleža na posameznih stvareh dosežejo fizično delitev iz skupnega premoženja. Takšna sodna praksa je bolj ali manj tudi v zapuščinskih postopkih. Najprej ugotovijo obseg dediščine, nato ugotovijo dedni delež vsakega od dedičev, potem pa brez zapisa sporazuma dedičev o delitvi dediščine sodišča odredijo vpis solastninske pravice v višini dednega deleža za vsakega od dedičev na vsaki od nepremičnin, ki spadajo v zapuščino. Zaključno delo je tako podalo odgovore tudi še na druga, v sodni praksi bolj ali manj sporna vprašanja. Novi Družinski zakonik je po mojem mnenju glede delitve skupnega premoženja nadgradil pravno ureditev v delu, ki se nanaša na 75. člen, kjer je določeno, da se premoženje razdeli po pravilih, ki veljajo za delitev skupnega premoženja in tako odstopa od 60. člena Zakona o zakonski zvezi in družinskih razmerij, ko se je premoženje razdelilo po pravilih, ki veljajo za skupno lastnino.

Keywords

skupno premoženje;delitev skupnega premoženja;pravdni postopek;nepravdni postopek;zapuščinski postopek;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization: UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [K. Preložnik]
UDC: 347.627.3(043.2)
COBISS: 56967171 Link will open in a new window
Views: 1360
Downloads: 232
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: Division of joint property under probate and litigation proceedings
Secondary abstract: In my diploma thesis, I analyzed the procedural problems that arise in the proceedings regarding the determination of the scope and division of joint property between the spouses in both non-contentious proceeding and litigation. Namely, the judicial proceeding itself usually begins in a non-contentious court, which will decide on the division of joint property only if between the spouses or. there is no dispute between the participants about the subject of the division and the size of their shares. However, if there is no agreement between the spouses on the amount of shares in the joint property and there is disagreement with the legal presumption of equality of shares, the non-contentious court will suspend the proceedings and refer parties to litigation. I paid most attention to the connection problems between the different types of procedure. For decades, case-law has also pragmatically allowed direct action to be taken for the division of joint property. As a rule, ex-spouses do not request the division of joint property first in non-contentious proceeding, but in litigation. The case-law also considers that by determing the shares in the common property, the co-ownership shares in all things that belong to the common are already determined. Courts also allow that the participants in litigations already with claims for the issuance of land registry documents and claims for the payment of the equivalent of a co-ownership share in individual things achieve physical division from the common property. Such case-law is more or less in probate proceedings. They first determine the extent of the inheritance, then determine the hereditary share of each of the heirs and then, without recording the heirs' agreement on the division of the inheritance, the court orders the entry of co-ownership in the amount of the hereditary share for each of the heirs on each estate. The diploma thesis thus provided answers to other questions, more or less controversial in case-law. In my opinion, the new Family Code has upgraded the legal regulation regarding the division of joint property in the part relating to Article 75, which stipulates that property is divided according to the rules applicable to the division of joint property and thus deviates from Article 60 of the Act on marriage and family relations when the property was divided according to the rules applicable to joint property.
Secondary keywords: joint property;division of joint property;ligitation;non-contentious proceeding;probate proceeding;
Type (COBISS): Bachelor thesis/paper
Thesis comment: Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages: 47 str.
ID: 12305703