Polona Podlesnik

The ZPP- D amendment introduced (to) strict provisions about the immediate dismissing of incomplete applications, submitted by attorneys, and applications, that attorney submit without presenting the power of attorney. Those provisions, which were mostly abolished by the Constitutional Court, are finally abolished with the ZPP- E amendment.

Important novelties for the parties of the procedure are the provisions, that regulate situations, when an otherwise timely action is brought before a court without jurisdiction, and it arrives before a court with jurisdiction only after the limitation period or exclusion period has already past- in compliance with the new regulation it is considered that an action is brought timely.

The provisions about the record are also amended- the judge can now decide, that a hearing or its part is recorded, or the judge can also make a record by himself. That means that in those cases, there is no need for the presence of a recording clerk on a hearing.

Novelties on the area of service are in a significant extent result of upgrades, especially in accordance with technology. In that sense are primarily important provisions, which create a legal basis for service by safe electronic way, while it is worth pointing out, that attorneys (among others) will now always be served by safe electronic way. The act also regulates other ways of service on attorneys, which are now equalized with legal persons and other professional persons- process can be served on a person, which is authorized, a worker, who is in the office or business premises or at headquarters, a legal representative and on a procurator. It will probably take some time for the enforcement of only electronic service to take place.

The novelty about service among attorneys is also important- when all the procedural parties have attorneys, the applications and annexes during the procedure can be served directly among attorneys, and the court may also impose direct reciprocal service on the attorneys (one copy of the application and the evidence regarding service must be sent also to the court with jurisdiction).

The party can now determine to be served by post office box. Such service shall be subject to provision about distinction between personal service and ordinary service- non-personally served documents are deemed to be served immediately, process, which is served in person, is deemed to be served no later than 15 days or when the customer takes over the writing from the post office box. Considering that in such way of service, the 15-day delay will surely arise, it is for the court to assess whether personal service in a particular case is really necessary.

Very important, if not the most important novelty about the regulation of service, which is enforced by the amendment ZPP- E, is a rule that provides that when the addressee shall raise one court document in the mailbox, he is obliged to raise all other court writings, which are in the mailbox and are served in person. This is not the case for impersonalized writing, as the sender is protected by the rule, that personally executed writing is deemed to have been served on the day it was placed in the post office box.[1]

[1] Summarized by the Civil Procedure Act (ZPP), unofficially consolidated text, with introduction explanations of the amendments of the Act and subject index by Aleš Galič, 6., supplemented edition, Ljubljana, UL RS 2017, pages 20- 30.