Press release – Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law in Civil Matters in its session of 19 September 2022

High Court of Review and Justice

 PRESS RELEASE

In its session of 19 September 2022, the High Court of Review and Justice – Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law in Civil Matters, lawfully established in each of the cases, considered five requests for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of certain points of law, and returned the following Judgments:

Judgment #45 in Case #1001/1/2022

The Panel sustains the request brought by the Administrative and Tax Litigation Chamber of Oradea Court of Appeals by a Ruling dated 15 April 2022 rendered in Case #3.722/111/CA/2020, and, as a result, establishes that:

Based on the interpretation and application of the stipulations of Art. 161 of the Norms for the Application of Provisions on the Award of Utility Contracts/Framework Agreements of Law #99/2016 on Utility Procurement, as approved by Government Decision #394/2016, the version in effect as of 5 March 2020, the 14-day term set for the contracting entity has the legal status of a procedural, legal, mandatory and relative term.

Failure to comply with the term does not trigger the sanction of nullification of the finding document.

Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.

Returned in public hearing today the 19th of September 2022.

Judgment #46 in Case #944/1/2022

 The Panel denies as inadmissible the request brought by the First Civil Chamber of Suceava Tribunal in Case #8541/314/2020 for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law: „Whether the reference to para. (2) of Art. 1 of Government Emergency Order #71/2009 on the Payment of Amounts Specified in Enforceable Titles Concerning the Award of Salary Rights to Staff in the Budgetary Sector, as approved with amendments by Law #230/2011, to para. (1) of the same article is interpreted as meaning that the term provided by para. (1) is represented by several successive terms, but individual by reference to the end of 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 for each installment detailed under items a)-e), or is interpreted as a Uniform term, by reference only to the end of 2016, as final date for the debt payment in installments”.

 Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.

Returned in public hearing today the 19th of September 2022.

Judgment #47 in Case #1003/1/2022

 The Panel denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Employment and Social Insurance Litigation Chamber of Craiova Court of Appeals in Case #2187/95/2020 for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:

Whether the stipulations of Art. 158 para. (6) and (7) of Law #263/2010 on the Uniform Public Pension System, as subsequently amended and supplemented, apply also to the situation where work seniority in work groups is proven under the conditions of Art. 158 para. (31) of the law, based on the employment record.

Whether a check of the inaccurate or incomplete nature of registrations in the employment record, in the meaning of Art. 158 para. (31) of the law, implies also a check of the lawfulness of inclusion of the work in the first and/or second work group in the meaning of Art. 158 para. (6) and (7) of Law #263/2010.

 Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.

Returned in public hearing today the 19th of September 2022.

Judgment #48 in Case #1005/1/2022

 The Panel denies as inadmissible the request brought by the First Civil Chamber of Maramureş Tribunal in Case #1572/336/2016* for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:

A clarification of the interpretation and application of the stipulations of Art. 28 of Law #1/2000 on the Recreation of Ownership Rights over Agricultural and Forestry Lands Requested under the stipulations of Land Law #18/1991 and of Law #169/1997, as subsequently amended and supplemented, in order for us to know whether these provisions, as amended by Art. I point 31 of Title VI of Law #247/2005 on Reforms in the Property and Justice Areas, and on Adjacent Steps, as subsequently amended and supplemented, allow for the creation of new compossessorates to continue the only associative form of this type existing before 1948, under circumstances where, under Law #1/2000 – its initial version, part of this associative form of property or its successors created an associative form and acquired the status of legal entity; in case of a negative answer, which are the legal consequences on the subsequently created associative form and on the ownership right acknowledged to it?

Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.

Returned in public hearing today the 19th of September 2022.

Judgment #49 in Case #884/1/2022

 The Panel denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Mixed Chamber for Administrative and Tax, Employment and Social Insurance Litigation of Cluj Tribunal in Case #1782/211/2021 for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:

Whether one can consider that the stipulations of Art. 31 para. (1) of Government Order #2/2001 on the Legal Status of Misdemeanors, as approved with amendments and supplements by Law #180/2002, as subsequently amended and supplemented, derogate from the stipulations of Art. 204 para. (1) of the Civil Procedure Code in the sense that, in case of filing of an administrative complaint, a petitioner does not have a possibility to amend their motion to sue, including by adding new grounds for the unlawfulness/ungroundedness of the finding minutes, after the expiry of the term of 15 days after the service of the misdemeanor minutes.

 Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.

Returned in public hearing today the 19th of September 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