Activity of a judge in civil contentious proceedings

V slovenskem pravdnem postopku velja načelo iura novit curia, a hkrati pravdni sodnik ne deluje le po načelu da mihi factum, dabo tibi ius. Sodnikova aktivnost je v večinski meri opredeljena s procesnimi jamstvi strank pravdnega postopka, saj mora sodnik aktivno zagotavljati uresničevanje pravice do poštenega sojenja, ki je zagotovljena na podlagi slovenske ustave ter Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin. Da to zagotovi, mora s pravilnim procesnim vodstvom poskrbeti za ustrezno sorazmerje tako procesnih jamstev kot tudi procesnih načel. Ker si mora sodnik prizadevati zadevo vsestransko raziskati in nuditi pravno varstvo pravemu nosilcu materialnopravnega upravičenja, a odločiti v razumnem roku, mora priprave na vodenje postopka in aktivno zbiranje procesnega gradiva začeti čim prej. Stopnja dejavnosti sodnika bo predvsem stvar njegove percepcije o vlogi sodnika v postopku. Predpostavka za polno učinkovitost sodnikovih aktivnosti v postopku je skrbno ravnanje strank v postopku, zato mora od njih zahtevati stopnjo odgovornosti, ki bo izraz avtonomije strank in skladna z njihovo vlogo v postopku ter bo hkrati uravnotežena s sodnikovo odgovornostjo v postopku. Sodnik mora v postopku zato delovati kot spodbujevalec procesne aktivnosti strank. Največja učinkovitost sodnikove aktivnosti pa bo dosežena le ob ustreznem dopolnjujočem sodelovanju sodnika in strank. Sodnik s pravilnim ravnanjem zagotavlja večjo sprejemljivost odločitve za stranke spora, ki v najboljšem primeru pomeni celovito končanje spora, hkrati pa prispeva k zaupanju javnosti v sodno vejo oblasti. Premajhna aktivnost sodnika negativno vpliva na vsebinsko kakovost sodnega varstva in končne odločitve ter učinkovitost pravdnega postopka, lahko pa rezultira tudi v kršitvi temeljnih procesnih jamstev strank. Aktivna vloga sodnika se v slovenski in primerljivih ureditvah vedno bolj poudarja že več desetletij, takšen pa bo trend nedvomno tudi v prihodnje.In Slovenian contentious civil proceedings, the principle of iura novit curia applies, but at the same time, the judge does not act only on the principle of da mihi factum, dabo tibi ius. The judge\u27s activity is largely defined by the procedural guarantees of the parties, because the judge must actively ensure the right to a fair trial, which is guaranteed by the Slovenian Constitution and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. To ensure this, he or she must, with proper procedural guidance, ensure an appropriate balance of procedural guarantees, as well as procedural principles. As the judge must strive to thoroughly investigate the case and provide legal protection to the right holder of substantive rights, yet decide within a reasonable time, he or she must begin preparations for the conduct of the proceedings and the active collection of procedural material as soon as possible. The level of activity of a judge will primarily be defined by his or her perception of the role of the judge in the proceedings. The precondition for the full efficiency of the judge\u27s activities in the proceedings is the diligent conduct of the parties. Therefore, he or she must demand from the partiesa level of responsibility that will be an expression of the parties\u27 autonomy and consistent with their role in the proceedings. The judge must, therefore, act in the proceedings as a facilitator of the parties\u27 procedural activity. The maximum efficiency of the judge\u27s activity will be achieved only with the appropriate and complementary cooperation of the judge and the parties. By acting correctly, a judge ensures greater acceptability of the final decision for the parties, which, at best, means a complete end to the dispute while also contributing to public confidence in the judiciary. Insufficient activity of a judge, on the other hand, negatively affects the substantive quality of judicial protection and of the final decision, as well as the efficiency of contentious civil proceedings. However, it can also result in a violation of the fundamental procedural guarantees of the parties. The active role of the judge has been increasingly emphasized in the Slovenian and comparable legal systems for several decades, and this trend will undoubtedly continue in the future