The amendment to the Enforcement and Insurance Act

The amendment to the Enforcement and Insurance Act (hereinafter: ZIZ), which is valid from 27 March 2021 onwards, enables debtors who are natural persons the possibility of individual postponement of enforcement in the event of exceptional circumstances. Previously, such a postponement for natural persons was provided for in the Seventh Anti-Corona Law, ie. PKP 7.

In accordance with the amended Article 71 of the ZIZ, the court will now be able to postpone enforcement at the proposal of the debtor or ex officio, if justified reasons are given.

As situations in which a proposal for postponement is justified, the provision considers, inter alia, (i) the case of enforcement against the debtor’s home in the case of the recovery of a monetary claim which is manifestly disproportionate to the value of the property and (ii) the case of enforcement for vacating and handing over an apartment or dwelling house which is the debtor’s home, if the debtor proves that he could not regulate the housing problem differently and the continuation of enforcement would endanger the position and interests of the debtor more than postponing enforcement and the interests of the creditor.

Furthermore, the amendment also marks as a situation in which a postponement would be justified the case when the debtor, as a consumer, asserts the invalidity of a legal transaction from a directly enforceable notarial deed. Last but not least, the reason for the postponement of enforcement can be due to other specially justified reasons shown by the debtor. With the latter, the debtor’s possibilities for postponing enforcement are noticeably expanded.

In accordance with the amendment to the ZIZ, the court will warn the debtor of the possibility of postponing enforcement in the enforcement order. In the case of enforcement against a property, the postponement will be possible only until the issuance of a sale order is issued, which the court warns the debtor in the enforcement order.

RELATED POSTS
The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Under certain conditions, a winemaker can indicate his wine-growing estate in the labeling of his wine, even if the process of grape cultivation and pressing took place on another winemaker’s estate 

The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Under certain conditions, a winemaker can indicate his wine-growing estate in the labeling of his wine, even if the process of grape cultivation and pressing took place on another winemaker’s estate 

In its judgment case no. C-354/22 dated November 23, 2023 the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU“) has…

Read more
The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Under certain conditions, a winemaker can indicate his wine-growing estate in the labeling of his wine, even if the process of grape cultivation and pressing took place on another winemaker’s estate 

The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Under certain conditions, a winemaker can indicate his wine-growing estate in the labeling of his wine, even if the process of grape cultivation and pressing took place on another winemaker’s estate 

In its judgment case no. C-354/22 dated November 23, 2023 the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU“) has…

Read more
Amendment to the Employment Relationships Act

Amendment to the Employment Relationships Act

On 7 November 2023, the National Assembly, in its extraordinary session, adopted the Act Amending the Employment Relationships Act (hereinafter:…

Read more

Address:

Dalmatinova ulica 2
SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Phone:

+386 59 097 400
+386 59 097 410

Email:

info@s-k.law

Social: