Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Încheierea nr. 1656/2014 AI generated

Transfer request denied despite valid stamp-duty payment; procedural exception of non-stamping rejected.

Case Number Încheierea nr. 1656/2014
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice rejected the respondent’s procedural exception of non-stamping but also dismissed the applicant’s request to transfer Case No. 13181/211/2013 from the Cluj Tribunal, with no further appeal available; the request for transfer based on legitimate suspicion was denied on the merits, while the filing fee was deemed validly paid. The dispute arose from an application for case transfer under grounds of legitimate suspicion, where the respondent challenged the sufficiency of a photocopied receipt as proof of fee payment. The court ruled that the judicial stamp duty had been anticipatorily paid in accordance with Article 33 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 80/2013, and that attaching a photocopy of the receipt did not trigger the sanction of dismissal as unstamped, since the fee had in fact been paid; the transfer request itself was nonetheless rejected.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 33 din O.U.G. nr. 80/2013; Transfer request denied despite valid stamp-duty payment; procedural exception of non-stamping rejected: 13181/211/2013 from the Cluj Tribunal, with no further appeal available; the request for transfer based on legitimate suspicion was denied on the merits, while the filing fee was deemed validly paid. The dispute arose from an application for case transfer under grounds of legitimate suspicion, where the respondent challenged the sufficiency of a photocopied receipt as proof of fee payment. The court ruled that the judicial stamp duty had been anticipatorily paid in accordance with Article 33 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 80/2013, and that attaching a photocopy of the receipt did not trigger the sanction of dismissal as unstamped, since the fee had in fact been paid; the transfer request itself was nonetheless rejected.

Keywords

AI generated
payment of stamp duty proof of payment unsuccessful tender procedure grounds for cassation transfer rendered moot validity of postal delivery

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 33 din O.U.G. nr. 80/2013
Basis for rejecting the exception of non-stamping, holding that the request was legally stamped as the fee was paid in advance.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 547/2025
Case transfer request annulled for failure to pay judicial stamp duty
Decizia nr. 78/2023
Extraordinary revision of jurisdiction transfer denied for non-payment of stamp duty despite payment in related case
Decizia nr. 1590/2022
Recourse annulled as insufficiently stamped, transfer denial stands
Încheierea nr. 2052/2013
Transfer request annulled as unfiled over unpaid 4 RON stamp duty.
Decizia nr. 2969/2014
Case transfer request annulled for failure to pay mandatory judicial stamp duty

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 33 din O.U.G. nr. 80/2013

Basis for rejecting the exception of non-stamping, holding that the request was legally stamped as the fee was paid in advance.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Prin cererea formulată la data de 5 mai 2014 petenta K.A. a solicitat strămutarea Dosarului nr. 13181/211/2013 al Tribunalului Cluj, pentru motive de bănuială legitimă.

În dovedirea cererii, petenta a anexat un set de înscrisuri, precum și dovada achitării taxei judiciare de timbru, în fotocopie.

Prin citația emisă la data de 13 mai 2014 petentei i s-a pus în vedere să depună dovada achitării timbrului judiciar de 0,3 RON, pe care aceasta l-a depus la dosar la data de 22 mai 2014.

Prin întâmpinarea formulată, intimatul Cabinet de avocat R.C.S. a invocat excepția netimbrării cererii, față de împrejurarea că dovada achitării taxei judiciare de timbru este o fotocopie simplă, necertificată pentru conformitate, a chitanței de plată.

Analizând excepția invocată, Înalta Curte constată că cererea de strămutare este legal timbrată, având în vedere că petenta a plătit taxa judiciară de timbru anticipat, așa cum prevede art. 33 din O.U.G. nr. 80/2013.

Împrejurarea că dovada achitării acestei taxe, respectiv chitanța din data de 5 mai 2014, a fost atașată la dosar în fotocopie nu este de natură să atragă sancțiunea anulării cererii, ca netimbrată, instanța apreciind că petenta a plătit taxa judiciară de timbru anticipat în cauză.

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D I S P U N E

Respinge excepția netimbrării cererii de strămutare invocată de intimatul Cabinet de avocat R.C.S.

Respinge cererea formulată de petenta K.A. privind strămutarea pricinii care formează obiectul Dosarului nr. 13181/211/2013 al Tribunalului Cluj.

Fără cale de atac.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi 29 mai 2014.