High Court of Review and Justice
PRESS RELEASE
In its hearing of 21 February 2022, the Panel for the Clarification of Law Matters in the Civil Law Area of the High Court of Review and Justice, legally established in each of the cases, settled four referrals for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of law matters, and rendered the following judgments:
Judgment no. 7 in case no. 2430/1/2021
The Panel dismisses, as inadmissible, a referral filed by Constanța Tribunal – Second Civil Chamber, in case no. 11436/212/2021, for a preliminary ruling concerning the following law matter:
Are the provisions of Art. 4 of Law no. 297/2018 on Real Estate Publicity, as republished and amended by Law no. 196/2020 amending and supplementing Law no. 297/2018 on the National Real Estate Publicity Register and repealing Government Ordinance no. 89/2000 on Steps for the Authorization of Operators and the Performance of Registrations in the Electronic Archive for Security Interests in Movable Property, which establish an additional requirement for the initiation of enforcement, namely that of registration of the enforceable title in the National Real Estate Publicity Register, applicable to invoices issued by water and sewage service operators, which are enforceable titles under the provisions of Art. 31 para. (17) of Water Supply and Sewage Service Law no. 241/2006, as republished and as subsequently amended and supplemented?
Mandatory, as per the provisions of Art. 521 para. (3) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Rendered in public hearing today, 21 February 2022.
Judgment no. 8 in case no. 3066/1/2021
The Panel dismisses, as inadmissible, the referral filed by Craiova Court of Appeals – First Civil Chamber, in case no. 21602/215/2019, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following law matter:
Are the provisions of Art. 484 para. (1) of the Civil Procedure Code interpreted in the sense that they establish an exception to the provisions of Art. 483 para. (2), by reference to Art. 94 point 1 item h) of the Civil Procedure Code, i.e., to the final and enforceable nature of judgments rendered in cases concerning the demolition of constructions, plantations or of any other fixed works also in cases where such applications are filed under Art. 32 para. (1) item b) of Law no. 50/1991 on the Authorization of Construction Works, as republished and as subsequently amended and supplemented?
Mandatory, as per the provisions of Art. 521 para. (3) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Rendered in public hearing today, 21 February 2022.
Judgment no. 9 in case no. 2825/1/2021 adjoined with case no. 2927/1/2021
The Panel dismisses, as inadmissible:
- a referral filed by Bucharest Court of Appeals – Third Chamber for Civil and Minor and Family Cases in case no. 11553/3/2019 for a preliminary ruling concerning the following law matter: based on the interpretation of the provisions of Art. 21 para. (6) of Law no. 165/2013 on Steps for Finalizing the Process of Restitution, In Kind or by Equivalent, of Properties Taken Abusively during the Communist Regime in Romania, as subsequently amended and supplemented, in case of challenges against decisions issued by the National Real Estate Compensation Commission, are compensations awarded by applying the notarial grid valid for the year previous to the issuance of the decision by the National Real Estate Compensation Commission or by applying the notarial grid valid for the year preceding the one when such decision remains final? And
- a referral filed by Timişoara Court of Appeals – First Civil Chamber, in case no. 877/108/2020, concerning the following law matter: what is the notarial grid applicable to the valuation of properties that cannot be returned in kind in case of disputes in which the plaintiff requests the court to order the National Real Estate Compensation Commission to settle the case by issuing a compensation decision that would contain the number of points set by the expertise ordered in the case. The case concerns a situation in which the Commission did not settle the case either until the date when the plaintiff lodged the action or after this, a situation that is not covered by the provisions of Art. 21 para. (6) of Law no. 165/2013, in the form in effect after the amendment set by Law no. 193/2021 approving Government Emergency Ordinance no. 72/2020 Suspending the Application of the Provisions of Art. 21 para. (6) of Law no. 165/2013 on Steps for Finalizing the Process of Restitution, In Kind or by Equivalent, of Properties Taken Abusively during the Communist Regime in Romania, and Setting Transitory Steps?
Mandatory, as per Art. 521 para. (3) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Rendered in public hearing today, 21 February 2022.
Judgment no. 10 in case no. 2878/1/2021
The Panel dismisses, as inadmissible, a referral filed by Bucharest Tribunal – Fourth Civil Chamber, in case no. 12588/300/2020, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following law matter:
Whether the concepts of “lands given for use” and “current holders of the right of use” specified by Art. 36 para. (3) of Land Law no. 18/1991, as republished and as subsequently amended and supplemented, are interpreted in a restrictive sense, only by reference to the existence of documents for the award for use or, as applicable, lease, or in the sense that they include also the situation where the state de facto leaves for use by the construction’s owners the land transferred to the state’s ownership under the provisions of Art. 30 of Law no. 58/1974 on the Urban Planning of Territory and of Urban and Rural Localities as a result of disposal of the construction, and whether in interpreting such concepts, one should take into account the actual volition of the parties at the time of conclusion of the sale and purchase agreement.
Mandatory, as per Art. 521 para. (3) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Rendered in public hearing today, 21 February 2022.
After the considerations are drafted, and the judgments are signed, they will be published in Part I of the Official Journal of Romania.
Information and Public Relations Office