The present commentary portrays the topic of interpretation of art. 79(1)(1)(h) from the Act on Court Costs in Civil Cases, in specific if the hypothesis of the given article consists of “out-of-court settlements”. Thesis of the resolution takes a categorical form, however it does not persuade the author of the commentary. Given the present nature of the topic as well as the fiscal theme of the issue, which is important to every participant of the civil proceeding, author attempts to confront the thesis resolved by the Supreme Court with general principles of interpretation, especially with the principle lege non distinguente nec nostrum est distinguere.