Povzetek: Določba 42. člena ZNP-1 sodnikom omogoča prožnost pri prilagajanju določb ZPP o prekluziji posebnostim posameznega nepravdnega postopka. To je tudi v skladu s smernicami v sodobnih ureditvah civilnih postopkov. V vseh nepravdnih postopkih lahko udeleženci ves čas postopka na prvi stopnji in še v pritožbi navajajo nova dejstva in predlagajo nove dokaze, če so v korist oseb, ki niso sposobne, da bi same skrbele za svoje pravice in interese. Kadar pa gre za navajanje drugih dejstev in ugovorov, je treba pri uporabi določb ZPP o prekluziji tudi v tistih predlagalnih nepravdnih postopkih, ki se nanašajo na ureditev premoženjskopravnih razmerij in so po svoji naravi najbližji pravdnemu postopku, upoštevati, ali so bili udeleženci postopka dovolj jasno opozorjeni, do kdaj morajo opraviti določena procesna dejanja in tudi kakšne posledice jih bodo zadele, če tega ne bodo storili.
Ključne besede: pravdni postopek, prekluzija, smiselna uporaba, predlagalni nepravdni postopki, uradni nepravdni postopki
Title: Preclusions in Non-Contentious Proceedings
Abstract: The provision of Article 42 of the Non-Contentious Civil Procedure Act (ZNP-1) allows judges to be creative in adapting the preclusion provisions of the Contentious Civil Procedure Act (ZPP) in different non-contentious proceedings. This is also in line with the trends in modern civil procedures. In all non-contentious proceedings, the parties may, at the first instance and in the appeal, present new facts and suggest new evidence if they are for the benefit of persons who are not capable of taking care of their rights and interests. When it comes to presenting other facts and objections, however, even in those proposed non-contentious proceedings relating to the regulation of property relations and which are by their nature closer to the contentious procedure, it must be taken into account whether the participants in the proceeding have been sufficiently clearly warned which procedural acts they have to perform and also what consequences they will suffer if they fail to do so.
Keywords: preclusion, contentious proceedings, non-contentious proceedings, non-contentious proceedings, meaningful use
