High Court of Cassation and Justice
PRESS RELEASE
In its session of 17 June 2024, the High Court of Cassation 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:
Judgement no. 31 in Case no. 215/1/2024
The Panel sustains the request brought by the Tribunal of Mureş – Civil Chamber, in Case no. 7054/320/2022, for a preliminary ruling and, as a result, establishes that:
The provisions of point 12 of Annex no. 1 to Law no. 46/2008 – Forestry Code, republished, as amended and subsequently completed, in relation to the legal provisions interpreted by Decision no. 3 of May 12, 2014 issued by the High Court of Cassation and Justice – The Panel for Appeal in the Interest of the Law, published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I, no. 445 of June 18, 2014, is to be interpreted as meaning that, in the case of rangers employed under an individual employment contract, it is necessary to incur patrimonial civil liability, pursuant to Law no. 53/2003 – Labor Code, republished, as amended and completed, in order to obtain an enforceable title.
Mandatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public hearing, today, 17 June 2024.
Judgement no. 32 in Case no. 832/1/2024
The Panel sustains the request brought by the Court of Appeal of Bucharest – Labour and Social Security Litigation Chamber, in Case no. 2006/87/2022, for a preliminary ruling and, as a result, establishes that:
In interpreting the provisions of Art. (1) of Law no. 49/1999 on I.O.V.R. pensions, with subsequent amendments and additions, the reference rule which refers to the conditions for granting a survivor’s pension for the children of those who died or disappeared during the war, as well as for the children of those who at the date of their death were I.O.V.R. pensioners, as war injured or disabled, also implies the fulfillment of the conditions set out in Article 84 of Law no. 263/2010 on the unitary public pension system, with subsequent amendments and additions.
Mandatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public hearing, today, 17 June 2024.
Judgement no. 33 in Case no. 855/1/2024
The Panel denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Court of Appeal of Bucharest – VII Labour and Social Security Litigation Chamber, in Case no. 23382/3/2022, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:
The interpretation of Article 75 para. (1) of Law no. 53/2003 – Labor Code, republished, as subsequently amended and supplemented, for the purposes of determining how the minimum period of 20 working days laid down in Article 75 para. (1) of Labor Code and whether the working day on which the notice is served on the employee may be considered to be the first of the 20 working days.
Mandatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public hearing, today, 17 June 2024.
Judgement no. 34 in Case no. 829/1/2024
The Panel sustains the request brought by the Tribunal of Mureş – Civil, in Case no. 18/289/2022 for a preliminary ruling and, as a result, establishes that:
The provisions of the Article 452 in relation to the provisions of Article 470 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as interpreted by Decision No. 9 of March 30, 2020, rendered by the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Panel for the resolution of appeals in the interest of the law, published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I, no. 548 of June 25, 2020, shall be interpreted as meaning that, if legal fees have been claimed before the first instance court, but no proof of payment of those fees has been provided by the date of the adjournment of the hearing on the merit of the case, such proof may be provided, by means of new documents, in the appeal filed against the decision rejecting the request of said legal fees.
Mandatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public hearing, today, 17 June 2024.
Judgement no. 35 in Case no. 853/1/2024
The Panel denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Court of Appeal of Bucharest – V Civil Chamber, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of the following point of law:
In interpreting the Article 43 para. (2) of Law no. 85/2014, in a situation where the party personally receives the judgment, in compliance with the Code of Civil Procedure, prior to its publication in the BPI, does the time limit for appeal run from the date of receiving the judgment, in compliance with the Code of Civil Procedure, or from the date of publication in the BPI?
Mandatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public hearing, today, 17 June 2024.
After the justification is written and the Judgment signed it shall be published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I.