Press release – Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law in Civil Matters in its session of 15 March 2021
High Court of Review and Justice
PRESS RELEASE
In its session of 15 March 2021, the High Court of Review and Justice – Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law in Civil Matters, lawfully established in each case, considered four requests for a preliminary ruling for the clarification of certain points of law, and returned the following Judgments:
Decision #13 in Case #3340/1/2020
Denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Court of Appeals Braşov – Civil Chamber, in Case # 2337/62/2019, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification on the following point of law:
“An interpretation of the stipulations in Art. 28, 29, 30 and 108 in Law #223/2015 on Military State Pensions, as amended and supplemented, so as to clarify whether the additional amounts of 3%, 6% and 9% stipulated by Art. 108 in the Law are included in the amount of pension that cannot exceed 85% of the military base pay or should be added to the amount of pension that cannot exceed 85% of the military base pay.”
Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 15th of March 2021.
Decision #14 in Case #3360/1/2020
Denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Court of Appeals Bucharest – Chamber VII for Labor Litigations and Social Benefits in Case # 22061/3/2019, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification on the following point of law: an interpretation of Judgment #36 of 4 June 2018, returned by the High Court of Review and Justice – Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law, published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I, issue #606 of 16 July 2018, so as to clarify whether it instates the judicial precedent as a source of law in the matter of pay for employees working in the judicial system.
Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 15th of March 2021.
Decision #15 in Case #3396/1/2020
Denies as inadmissible the request brought by the Court of Appeals Oradea – Chamber I for Civil Matters in Case # 445/111/2020, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification on the following points of law:
“Clarification by the High Court of Review and Justice of the way to update the calculation basis of pension for a former magistrate who on the date of retirement was receiving a stipend of 15% of their monthly pre-tax pay for having a Doctor’s degree, in application of the stipulations of Art. 85 para. (2) in Law #303/2004 corroborated with the stipulations of Art. 14 para. (1) in Law #153/2017.”
Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 15th of March 2021.
Decision #16 in Case #3412/1/2020
Denies as inadmissible the request brought by Tribunal Olt – Chamber I for Civil Matters in Case # 416/207/2020*, for a preliminary ruling for the clarification on the following points of law:
“1. In the interpretation and application of the stipulations of Art. 670 para. (1) and (6) in the Civil Procedure Code, considering also the RIL Judgment #8/2016 and Judgment #15/2016 returned by the Panel for the Clarification of Certain Points of Law, does the Bailiff’s Office have defendant legal standing in the challenge of enforcement which demands reversal of the order to pay advance on the expenditures needed to continue the foreclosure procedure, with applicability of Art. 78 para. (1) in the Civil Procedure Code or Art. 78 para. (2) in the Civil Procedure Code concerning the ex officio introduction of other parties in the trial;
2. As a result of the answer to the first question, requesting an interpretation of whether the appellate court can raise ex officio a grounds of unlawfulness of the judgment returned by the court of first instance because of the absence of the Bailiff’s Office defendant legal standing and participation, in case they were not mentioned in the appeal, with the consequence of applicability of Art. 480 para. (3) or Art. 480 para. (6) in the Civil Procedure Code, in the absence of the parties’ motion to refer the case for retrial and in the restrictive conditions stipulated by Art. 478 para. (1) in the Civil Procedure Code, as well as Art. 78 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.”
Obligatory, as under Art. 521 para. (3) in the Civil Procedure Code.
Returned in public session today, the 15th of March 2021.
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