We use cookies on our website.
Some of them are necessary for the functioning of the site, but you can decide about others. View more
In judgment II Ips 54/2025 the Supreme Court of Slovenia held that the methodology used to establish legally relevant facts is a question of law, rather than a question of fact. The technical principles underpinning the opinions of court-appointed experts are therefore subject to judicial scrutiny in the same way as the application of any other legal or statutory rules. The calculations performed using that methodology, however, constitute a question of fact.
This distinction is crucial in all disputes involving issues from other, non-legal disciplines. The assumptions used by a court-appointed financial or other expert when calculating:
must always also be assessed against the legal rules defining the purpose of those claims. A misunderstanding of the statutory purpose can lead to substantial discrepancies, which in the case at hand exceeded 30% of the value. Understanding technical methodologies and their consistency with the purposes pursued by the law or contract is therefore essential to enforcing rights and fulfilling obligations.
The Court held that a claim for reimbursement of investments in another person’s real estate must be quantified using the “cost approach based on replacement costs”. It also provided a reasoned explanation of why this method was consistent with the statutory purpose.
For legal certainty, it is essential that case law also establishes consistent positions on the technical methodologies used to quantify other types of claims as soon as possible. This would help resolve numerous disputes in which we represent clients concerning disagreements over the fair value of real estate and financial instruments, whether on a market or non-market basis, or prices for other goods or services.
Author: Matjaž Jan