higher court

c) Delegation of Territorial Jurisdiction by a Higher Court

The court in the first instance shall send the appeal to the higher court within three days;

(2) The higher court may uphold, repeal or amend the misdemeanour judgement.

(1) An appeal may be lodged with a higher court against a misdemeanour judgement.

** HIGHER LSC = Higher Labour and Social Court

(1) A jurisdictional dispute between courts in the first instance shall be decided by a higher court.

If the exclusion applies to the president of the court, the case shall be decided by the vice-president of the court in the function of president of the court, and if the exclusion also applies to the vice-president of the court, the president of the court shall appoint a deputy president of the court from among the court's judges; if this is not possible, either, the president of the court shall request from the president of a higher court or the president of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia to appoint his deputy.

(1) A higher court shall issue decisions after oral consultation and voting by the members of the senate.

(1) The higher court shall issue an order to dismiss late or impermissible appeals, if this has not been already done by the court in the first instance.

(1) The payment of costs incurred by a higher court shall be decided upon by that court in accordance with the provisions of Articles 143 to 146 of this Act.

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the state.

Article 166 (1) The court in the first instance must perform all procedural acts and discuss all disputed questions to which the higher court has drawn attention in its decision.

(3) An appeal may be lodged against the compliance detention order with a higher court within eight days of receipt of the order.

The appellant shall have the right to lodge an appeal with a higher court against the order dismissing a late or impermissible appeal.

The higher court may repeal a judgement issued by the court in the first instance only partially, if specific parts of the judgement may be excluded without any effects on the correctness of the decision.

(8) The higher court may also amend the misdemeanour judgement issued by the court in the first instance if it finds that the court in the first instance made a mistake in assessing a document or other evidence which it did not take but on which it based its judgement.

Higher courts shall have jurisdiction over:

- register for keeping the joint record of the number of penalty points imposed on individual perpetrators of misdemeanours, kept by a higher court;

(1) An appeal may be lodged with a higher court against a misdemeanour judgement or decision passed in the first instance, unless otherwise determined by this Act.

They shall be assigned to work at individual higher courts by the Judicial Council, where the latter shall consistently take into account the number of systemised and occupied posts at higher courts, the need for ensuring balanced workload on higher court judges, distance from the place of permanent residence of individual judges to the court's head office, and individual judges'willingness to wok in individual courts.

(3) In the cases referred to in the preceding paragraph the court in the first instance shall send the appeal to a higher court within twenty-four hours of expiry of all appellate deadlines referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 151 of this Act;

(1) Decisions on appeals issued by the higher court shall be subject, mutatis mutandis, to the application of the provisions of Articles 135, 136 and 138 and paragraph 2 of Article 140 of this Act.

The higher court shall also amend the misdemeanour judgement issued by the court in the first instance if it finds that the considered circumstances must be assessed in a different manner within the framework of the determination of misdemeanour sanctions or deprivation of a pecuniary advantage.

- higher courts as courts responsible for deciding misdemeanours in the second instance.

(3) If the higher court repeals the misdemeanour judgement issued by the court in the first instance due to substantial violations of the provisions governing misdemeanour proceedings, the grounds for the decision must include a specification of which provisions have been violated and the nature of an individual violation.

(9) If the only reason for repealing the judgement issued by the court in the first instance is a mistake in the finding of facts, and only a different assessment of the already-established facts is required for a correct judgement, where at the same time no new evidence is required, the higher court shall not repeal the judgement issued by the court in the first instance, but shall act in accordance with paragraph 7 of this article.

(2) In the grounds for the decision the higher court shall assess all indications in the appeal and the indications of violations of the substantive provisions of this Act or regulation governing the misdemeanour which it observed ex officio.

(6) The higher court shall issue an order to repeal the misdemeanour judgement issued by the court in the first instance even if the misdemeanour judgement issued by the court in the first instance is not challenged due to a mistake in the finding of facts or incomplete finding of facts, if during the procedure of deciding the appeal a reasonable doubt emerges regarding the truthfulness of the decisive facts established in the misdemeanour judgement, due to which the court believes that a mistake has been made in the finding of facts or the facts have been established incompletely to the detriment of the accused person.

(4) The higher court shall grant the appeal and issue an order repealing the judgement issued by the court in the first instance, or repeal the judgement ex officio and return the case for retrial, if it finds that a substantial violation has been committed of the provisions governing misdemeanour proceedings, except for the cases specified in paragraphs 5 and 7 of this article, or if it finds that, due to a mistake in the finding of facts or incomplete finding of facts, the court in the first instance must supplement the proceedings or institute new proceedings and adopt a new decision on the issue.

(2) The exclusion of a higher court judge may be requested by the persons referred to in the preceding paragraph within the framework of an appeal against a judgement or order and if they become aware of a reason for exclusion after having lodged the appeal and no later than by the time the decision on the appeal is issued.

The Court of Audit is the highest authority for supervising state accounts, the state budget, and all public spending.

(7) The higher court shall grant the appeal and issue an order amending the misdemeanour judgement or amend it ex officio, if it finds that the decisive facts specified in the misdemeanour judgement issued by the court in the first instance have been established correctly, but that a different decision must be issued with respect to the actual situation established and with the appropriate application of regulations; with respect to the state of facts, it shall also amend the decision in the cases referred to in points 2, 5, 7 and 8 of paragraph 1 of Article 155 of this Act.

(2) The archives of misdemeanour judges shall be assumed by local courts, and the archives of the Misdemeanours Panel of the Republic of Slovenia shall be assumed by higher courts.

The share of women at courts and prosecutor's offices is slightly higher than the share of men, however, higher in the judicial hierarchy of court and prosecutor's office, a decrease in this share is perceived.

The higher court shall test the part of the misdemeanour judgement which is challenged by the appeal, but it must also test, ex officio, whether a substantial violation has been committed of the provisions of misdemeanour proceedings referred to in points 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of paragraph1 of Article 155, and whether the substantive provisions of the Act or regulation governing the misdemeanour have been violated to the detriment of the accused person (Article 156 of this Act).

Treatment of Lyme borreliosis is reasonable in any stage of the disease, however, the efficacy is the highest early in the course of the illness.

(2) An appeal against other decisions passed by the court in the first instance shall be permitted only if the court imposed a fine higher than the minimum fine prescribed for the misdemeanour, secondary sanction or deprivation of a pecuniary advantage, or if the court passed a decision on a property claim.

(2) Following the commencement of work in the area of misdemeanour cases, higher courts shall assume all unresolved cases conducted by the Misdemeanour Panel of the Republic of Slovenia.

Where immunity has been waived and criminal proceedings are instituted against a Judge, he shall be tried, in any of the Member States, only by the court competent to judge the members of the highest national judiciary.

(1) The business premises, equipment, financial and other assets which upon commencement of work by courts in the area of misdemeanour cases are used by state authorities with the title of misdemeanour judge and by the Misdemeanours Panel of the Republic of Slovenia shall be assumed by local and higher courts for their use.

(1) Higher courts shall decide on the cases referred to in points 1 and 2 of the preceding article in the form of a panel, which shall consist of one judge as the president of the panel, judge - reporter, and judge - member of the panel.

Persons that successfully completed the university study programme after the entry into force of the Higher Education Act (Ur. l. RS, Nos. 67/93, 39/95 [constitutional court ruling], 18/98 [constitutional court ruling], 35/98 [constitutional court ruling], 99/99 and 64/2001) or that successfully completed an appropriate four- year tertiary programme prior to the entry into force of the aforementioned act shall also be deemed to have gained the university qualification that is a condition for conducting inspection supervision and a condition for participants in the construction of works pursuant to this act.

(a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting.

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that in its criminal law the descriptions of the offences referred to in Articles 2 and 3 committed by or against its Government Ministers, elected members of its parliamentary chambers, the members of its highest Courts or the members of its Court of Auditors in the exercise of their functions apply similarly in cases where such offences are committed by or against Members of the Commission of the European Communities, the European Parliament, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors of the European Communities respectively in the exercise of their duties.

Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that in its criminal law the descriptions of the offences referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in Articles 2 and 3 committed by or against its Government Ministers, elected members of its parliamentary chambers, the members of its highest Courts or the members of its Court of Auditors in the exercise of their functions apply similarly in cases where such offences are committed by or against members of the Commission of the European Communities, the European Parliament, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors of the European Communities respectively in the exercise of their duties.

The Judges and Advocates-General of the Court of Justice shall be chosen from persons whose independence is beyond doubt and who possess the qualifications required for appointment to the highest judicial offices in their respective countries or who are jurisconsults of recognised competence; they shall be appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States after consultation of the panel provided for in Article III-357.

(3) At the proposal of the personnel council and by taking into account the years of work experience in administrative or state bodies, the judge of the court from the first paragraph of Article 5 of this Law may, depending on his work results, be promoted to a higher wage class or to the position of a judicial counsellor, irrespective of the criteria used as the foundation for the classification of judges into wage classes or for promotion to the position of judicial counsellor under the Law on the Judicial Service.

provided that where such liability arises as a result of damage caused by a nuclear incident involving nuclear substances in the course of carriage in one and the same means of transport, or, in the case of storage incidental to the carriage, in one and the same nuclear installation, the maximum total amount for which such operators shall be liable shall be the highest amount established with respect to any of them pursuant to Article 7 and provided that in no case shall any one operator be required, in respect of a nuclear incident, to pay more than the amount established with respect to him pursuant to Article 7.

d) If nuclear damage gives rise to liability of more than one operator in accordance with this Convention, the liability of these operators shall be joint and several, provided that where such liability arises as a result of nuclear damage caused by a nuclear incident involving nuclear substances in the course of carriage in one and the same means of transport, or, in the case of storage incidental to the carriage, in one and the same nuclear installation, the maximum total amount for which such operators shall be liable shall be the highest amount established with respect to any of them pursuant to Article metricconverterProductID7. In7. In no case shall any one operator be required, in respect of a nuclear incident, to pay more than the amount established with respect to him pursuant to Article 7.