TFL Vsebine / Revija Revus

V celinskih pravnih sistemih je ustaljeno pravilo, po katerem odločitve sodišč niso formalni pravni vir. Ne glede na to pa z ustavno pravico do enakosti pred zakonom iz 14. člena URS (ta zahteva, da so enaki primeri odločeni enako) sodna praksa pridobi vlogo pomembnega pravnega vira tudi v novoveških pravnih sistemih, podobno kot določa doktrina stare decisis. Slovensko ustavno sodišče je razsojanju ustavnih pritožb že podalo pomembne odločitve, potrjujoče to načelo, s katerim so zavezana redna sodišča. Ustavna pravica do enakosti pred zakonom je kršena, če je o nekem vprašanju sodna praksa ustaljena in v pritožnikovem primeru sodišče od nje odstopi, ne da bi za to izrecno navedlo utemeljene razloge. Takšen odstop od ustaljene sodne prakse lahko označimo kot samovoljno, zato bo ustavna pritožba zoper takšno sodno odločbo uspešna.

A traditional rule in continental legal systems is that courts’ decisions are not a formal legal source. However, through a constitutional right to equality before the law, which also demands that like cases should be decided alike, a case law gains a position of an important legal source also in modern continental legal systems, similarly to a stare decisis doctrine. The Constitutional Court of Slovenia has, when adjudicating in the field of constitutional complaints, already delivered important decisions confirming this principle that binds ordinary judiciary. The constitutional right to equality before the law is violated if there is a well established case law on certain point and if in applicant’s case a court has departed from it without explicit and thorough grounds why it departed from an established precedent. Such a departure from an established case law can be denoted as being arbitrary and the applicant’s constitutional complaint against such a judicial decision will be successful.