Reference no.:
Official Gazette RS, No. 59/2008 and OdlUS XVII, 34 | 20.05.2008
In accordance with the second paragraph of Article 53 of the Execution of Judgments in Civil Matters and Securing of Claims Act, the motion of a debtor must contain a statement of reasons. If an order on execution on the basis of the authentic document is challenged in the part in which it is decided that a debtor must pay a claim, it is deemed that in this part the motion contains the statement of reasons if the debtor states facts by which it substantiates such motion and proposes evidence by which the facts stated in the motion are to be established (the second paragraph of Article 61 of the Execution of Judgments in Civil Matters and Securing of Claims Act). In view of the above-stated, only a motion which does not contain any legally relevant facts or any arguments for the statements that it contains and/or evidence which refer to such facts or statements can be without a statement of reasons. If a debtor proposes evidence, no restrictions apply as regards the selection of the means of evidence. The standpoint of the courts that the complainant should have proved her allegations by means of “appropriate written evidence” is therefore inconsistent with the right to the equal protection of rights within the meaning of Article 22 of the Constitution. As the courts deemed that the motion does not contain the statement of reasons, they decided on its substantiality, whereby the complainant was deprived of the possibility that her obligation be decided in civil proceedings where all the available means of evidence would be taken into consideration.
Document in PDF:
Type of procedure:
constitutional complaint
Type of act:
individual act
Mojca Muhič, Gornja Radgona
Date of application:
Date of decision:
Type of decision adopted:
Outcome of proceedings:
annulment or annulment ab initio