Countrerclaim under the civil procedure act

V diplomski nalogi sem se osredotočil na celotno predstavitev instituta nasprotne tožbe, ki ga ureja zakon o pravdnem postopku. Najprej sem predstavil procesna dejanja toženca, med katera spada tudi nasprotna tožba. Na kratko sem povzel preostale možnosti, ki jih tožena stranka lahko uporabi kot obrambno sredstvo proti tožniku. Brani se lahko z materialnimi, procesnimi in pobotnimi ugovori ali pa v pravdi sploh ne sodeluje ter prizna dejstva oziroma pripozna tožbeni zahtevek. Bistvo vsebinskega dela v jedru tožbe predstavljajo pogoji, ki jih mora izpolnjevati tožena stranka, da iz obrambe preide v nasprotni napad. Izpolnjevati mora pogoje, zahtevka iz nasprotne in samostojne tožbe morata biti v medsebojni zvezi, lahko se med seboj pobotata, če gre za predhodno vprašanje, od katerega je odvisna odločba o tožbenem zahtevku in hkrati predpisana enaka vrsta postopka in enaka stvarna pristojnost sodišča, ki odloča o obeh zahtevkih. Institut nasprotne tožbe utrjuje načelo ekonomičnosti in pospešitve postopka, saj strankam ponuja možnost, da rešijo sporna razmerja v enem postopku. Če na kratko povzamem ključne ugotovitve, ki sem jih spoznal med pisanjem diplomskega dela, lahko trdim, da je nasprotna tožba samostojna tožba stranke, ki je tožena, saj se glede vsebine in preostalih vprašanj uporabljajo identična pravila kot za tožbo. Ko pogoji za uveljavljanje nasprotne tožbe niso podani v zadostni meri, je sodišče ne zavrne, ampak šteje za samostojno tožbo in obravnava v novem postopku. Poudariti moram, da vložitev nasprotne tožbe ni le dolžnost, ampak pravica toženca. Praktičen pomen nasprotne tožbe je, da imajo nekatera obrambna dejanja toženca učinek le v konkretni zadevi, z nasprotno tožbo pa si toženec lahko zagotovi pravnomočno odločitev sodišča.In this presentation I focused to introduce fully the Institute of the Counterclaim, which is regulated by the Civil Procedure Act. First I presented the procedural actions of the defendant, which includes also the counterclaim. Briefly, I also summarized the other options which could be used by the defendant as a means of defense against the plaintiff. The defendant can defend himself with material, procedural and offsetting objections or in a litigation does not take part or can recognize a claim. The focus of the substantive work in the main part represents the conditions which must be fulfilled by the defendant to come from defense to counter-attack. Following conditions must be fulfilled: the claim from the opposite and separate action must be in relation to each other, it may come to a compromise in the case of the preliminary question and the same type of procedure and the same substantive jurisdiction of the court must be determined. The Institute of a Counterclaim consolidates the principle of economy and speeds up the process, because it provides clients to resolve contentious relationship in one procedure. To briefly summarize the key findings I\u27ve learned through the study, I can say that the counterclaim is an independent action of the defendant, because the content and the remaining issues apply identical rules as to the action. However, when the conditions for invoking counterclaim are not given sufficiently, the court does not reject it, but considers it for an independent action and addresses it in the new procedure. I must emphasize, however, that the counterclaim is not a duty but a right of the defendant. The practical importance of the counterclaim is that some defensive actions of the defendant effect only in a specific case, but with the counterclaim defendant can achieve an effect of res judicata