High Court of Review and Justice
PRESS RELEASE
In its session of 4 May 2022, the High Court of Review and Justice – Panels for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law, lawfully established in each of the cases, considered three requests for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of certain points of law, and returned the following Judgments:
Decision #21 in Case #240/1/2022
Denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Bacău Tribunal, Criminal Chamber, in Case # 7717/180/2021, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:
In the interpretation and application of Art. 469 para. (5) and para. (7) in the Criminal Procedure Code on sustaining an avenue of appeal against the decision to admit reopening of a criminal trial, quashing such decision has the effect of re-acquisition of res judicata status and of the enforceable character of the judgment based on which the motion was filed to reopen the criminal trial.
In the affirmative case it is necessary to issue new forms of enforcement.
Obligatory as of the date of publication in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I under Art 477 para. (3) in the Criminal Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 4th of May 2022.
Decision #22 in Case #241/1/2022
Sustains the request brought by the Court of Appeals Bucharest – Chamber II for Criminal Matters, in Case # 4091/229/2018 (1518/2021) for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:
“Whether in the interpretation and application of Art. 338 para. (2) in the Criminal Code, the actions of an individual of tampering with the crime scene also include changing the position of the vehicle that was involved in a traffic accident, a phrase distinctly stipulated in Art. 77 para. (3) in Government Emergency Order #195/2002 on Circulation of Public Roads” and consequently rules that:
In the interpretation and application of Art. 338 para. (2) in the Criminal Code concerning the crime of leaving the scene of a vehicle accident or tampering with or removing of evidence thereof, the Court rules that “the actions of an individual of tampering with the crime scene also include changing the position of the vehicle that was involved in a traffic accident.”
Obligatory as of the date of publication in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I under Art 477 para. (3) in the Criminal Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 4th of May 2022.
Decision #23 in Case #470/1/2022
Sustains the request brought by the Brașov Tribunal – Criminal Chamber in Case #13117/197/2019/a1 for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law: “Whether the document should be verified in terms of lawfulness and solid grounds by the hierarchically superior prosecutor, and what is the maximum term within which such verification can take place” and consequently rules that:
The document whereby a prosecutor corrects flaws in an indictment, in the conditions stipulated by Art. 345 para. (3) in the Criminal Procedure Code, is not subject to verification in terms of lawfulness and solid grounds by the hierarchically superior prosecutor.
Denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Brașov Tribunal – Criminal Chamber in Case #13117/197/2019/a1 for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:
“What is the legal nature of the 5-day deadline within which a prosecutor can corrects flaws in an indictment; what kind of procedural act should be used to perform the correction.”
Obligatory as of the date of publication in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I under Art 477 para. (3) in the Criminal Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 4th of May 2022.
After the justification is written and the Judgment signed it shall be published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I.
OFFICE FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION AND RELATIONS