Court procedural record / Primary source

Bojana Vujić’s panel grants 30 days for a written position and fee-exemption evidence — 5 November 2024

Milan Petrović attends in person; no one appears for the CSR despite the recorded summons to its representative. The Appellate Court’s R.22/24 ruling is handed to him. He asks for time to seek legal help and reports losing his job. The panel grants 30 days for a written submission and evidence concerning court fees.

Basic Court in Novi Sad 2024-11-05
At the non-public hearing of 5 November 2024 in P2.1435/24, Bojana Vujić presides and Milan Petrović appears in person. No one appears for the defendant CSR. The record states that the defendant’s representative was duly summoned by a ruling of 16 September; that representative is not the plaintiff’s former lawyer. The hearing runs from 11:00 to 11:30. The court records that the Appellate Court in Novi Sad’s ruling R.22/24 of 21 August 2024 is handed directly to the plaintiff at this hearing. The linked Appellate Court ruling assigns subject-matter jurisdiction to the Basic Court. The plaintiff states that he is unversed in law, wants to seek legal assistance and asks for 30 days to set out his position in writing. He says he has lost his job and will provide evidence of an agreed termination of his employment contract, and asks for exemption from court fees after submitting that evidence. He proposes that no hearing be scheduled before his submission arrives. The panel grants 30 days from announcement of the ruling for the written position and fee-exemption evidence. It will decide the further course in writing after the submission and orders a copy of the record sent to the CSR. The ruling does not itself exempt him from court fees. Later author’s account: he was told that a summons for the same hearing was being sent for the second time. He does not know whether the first was sent to him or to his former lawyer, who had informed the court that she no longer represented him. He received the latest summons and came alone. This account remains separate from the court’s statement about summoning the defendant’s representative.
Back to documents Open PDF Open annotated text

Related evidence

Bojana Vujić’s panel grants 30 days after the plaintiff seeks legal help and court-fee exemption
Why this source is linked
Related source

The 5 November event is supported by the operative part of the hearing record: Bojana Vujić’s panel grants the plaintiff 30 days from announcement for his written position and evidence concerning court-fee exemption, will determine the further course in writing, and orders the record sent to the CSR. The period is granted; fee exemption itself is not decided here.

**The court will decide the further course of proceedings in writing, after the plaintiff’s written submission has been delivered.** **The plaintiff is granted the requested period of 30 days from the day this ruling is announced to state his position in writing on the further course of proceedings in this legal matter and to submit evidence concerning exemption from court fees.** **Deliver a copy of this record to the Centre for Social Work of the City of Novi Sad.**
Open supporting passage
Aleksandra Pekez Kalinić’s panel assigns jurisdiction to the Basic Court — R.22/24, 21 August 2024
Why this source is linked
Related source

The hearing record expressly identifies R.22/24 of 21 August 2024 as the Appellate Court ruling handed directly to the plaintiff on 5 November. The linked document is that ruling by Aleksandra Pekez Kalinić’s panel, which assigns jurisdiction to the Basic Court. The connection distinguishes the August decision from its recorded handover at this hearing.

It is recorded that the Appellate Court in Novi Sad’s ruling **R.22/24 of 21 August 2024** is handed directly to the plaintiff.
Open supporting passage
Plaintiff’s written submission in P2.1435/24 — 4 December 2024
Why this source is linked
Related source

The submission expressly says it acts on the court’s order and identifies the supporting agreement it says it is submitting. The linked 5 November record grants 30 days for a written position and evidence concerning court-fee exemption. The 4 December text is dated 29 days later. The agreement is listed, but is not part of this one-page PDF; neither the receipt date nor a fee-exemption decision is established by the submission.

Acting on the court’s order, I submit evidence of unemployment, namely the Agreement on Termination of Employment dated 3 October 2024. **Attachment:** - Agreement on Termination of Employment dated 3 October 2024, a copy enclosed. This evidence confirms that I have lost my employment, in accordance with the statements in the previous record.
Open supporting passage
Judge Bojana Vujić declares the Basic Court without jurisdiction — conflict referred to the Appellate Court, 29 April 2024
Why this source is linked
Related source

This later author’s account describes a second summons for the same hearing, his uncertainty about the first recipient, and his attendance alone after representation ended. It connects with the separate later author’s note about self-representation from November in the 29 April document package. The linked account is an appendix to that package, not part of the April court ruling’s reasoning or operative part.

The author explains that he was told that the summons for **the same hearing** was being sent **for the second time**. He does not know whether the first summons was sent to him or to his former lawyer, who had informed the court that she no longer represented him. He received the latest summons and came to the hearing alone. This is his later account; it is separate from the court record’s statement about the defendant CSR’s representative being duly summoned.
Open supporting passage