Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 2879/2003 AI generated

Jurisdiction of fiscal appeal remanded to first court under pre-2003 rules

Case Number Decizia nr. 2879/2003
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court sent the appeal (recurs) back to the Tribunal Vaslui, where it was first filed, holding that the lower court had wrongly forwarded the case file to the Supreme Court of Justice. The appellant prevailed on this procedural point, and the appeal remains pending for referral to the competent court under pre-August 28, 2003 rules. The dispute is a procedural jurisdiction issue in an administrative/fiscal appeal against a civil judgment of June 12, 2003, filed before the entry into force of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 58/2003. Decisive legal basis: transitional provisions under Article II(3) of O.U.G. No. 58/2003 and Article 725(4) of the Civil Procedure Code, which mandate that remedies and time limits for judgments rendered before a new law's entry into force are governed by the prior law, so the appeal had to be routed through the original filing court under Article 302 C. proc. civ., not directly to the Supreme Court.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 725 pct. 4 C. proc. civ, art. 302 C. proc. civ, Art. II alin. (3) din O.U.G. nr. 58/2003; Jurisdiction of fiscal appeal remanded to first court under pre-2003 rules: The appellant prevailed on this procedural point, and the appeal remains pending for referral to the competent court under pre-August 28, 2003 rules. The dispute is a procedural jurisdiction issue in an administrative/fiscal appeal against a civil judgment of June 12, 2003, filed before the entry into force of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 58/2003. Decisive legal basis: transitional provisions under Article II(3) of O.U.G. No. 58/2003 and Article 725(4) of the Civil Procedure Code, which mandate that remedies and time limits for judgments rendered before a new law's entry into force are governed by the prior law, so the appeal had to be routed through the original filing court under Article 302 C. proc. civ., not directly to the Supreme Court.

Keywords

AI generated
grounds of jurisdiction fiscal law civil judgment time of filing procedural rules emergency government ordinance

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 725 pct. 4 C. proc. civ
Used to justify that the judgment remains subject to the appeal rules and deadlines of the law under which it was pronounced, supporting the referral of the file back to the court where the appeal was filed.
art. 302 C. proc. civ
Cited in the reasoning to confirm that the appeal was correctly filed at the Tribunal Vaslui under the procedural law applicable at the time of the judgment.
Art. II alin. (3) din O.U.G. nr. 58/2003
Main ground for the decision: determines the appeal rules applicable to the judgment, because the judgment was pronounced before the entry into force of the ordinance, thus the appeal remains subject to the law under which it was pronounced.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 1209/2004
Tax appeal remanded to original tribunal for jurisdictional routing under pre-2003 procedural rules
Decizia nr. 2869/2003
Remittal ordered for appeal filed before 2003 procedural reform; jurisdiction rests with lower court.
Decizia nr. 3486/2003
Transitionary application of appellate jurisdiction under Emergency Governmental Order No. 58/2003
Decizia nr. 2861/2003
Jurisdiction of civil appeal under transitional law for judgments pre-dating procedural reform
Decizia nr. 2853/2003
Jurisdiction of appeal under intertemporal procedural law for judgments rendered prior to O.U.G. 58/2003 entry into force

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. II alin. (3) din O.U.G. nr. 58/2003

Main ground for the decision: determines the appeal rules applicable to the judgment, because the judgment was pronounced before the entry into force of the ordinance, thus the appeal remains subject to the law under which it was pronounced.

Art. 725 pct. 4 C. proc. civ.

Used to justify that the judgment remains subject to the appeal rules and deadlines of the law under which it was pronounced, supporting the referral of the file back to the court where the appeal was filed.

Art. 302 C. proc. civ.

Cited in the reasoning to confirm that the appeal was correctly filed at the Tribunal Vaslui under the procedural law applicable at the time of the judgment.

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

Analizând regularitatea sesizării sale, constată următoarele:

În conformitate cu dispozițiile art. II alin. (3) din O.U.G. nr. 58/2003, intrată în vigoare – potrivit art. III din aceiași ordonanță – la data de 28 august 2003, „Hotărârile pronunțate înainte de intrarea în vigoare a prezentei ordonanțe de urgență rămân supuse căilor de atac și termenelor prevăzute de legea sub care au fost pronunțate”.

De altfel, același mod de reglementare se regăsește și în prevederile art. 725 pct. 4 C. proc. civ., care stabilesc că „Hotărârile pronunțate înainte de intrarea în vigoare a legii noi, rămân supuse căilor de atac și termenelor prevăzute de legea sub care au fost pronunțate”.

În cauză, se constată că hotărârea recurată a fost pronunțată la data de 12 iunie 2003, deci anterior intrării în vigoare a O.U.G. nr. 58/2003, situație în care în mod corect cererea de recurs a fost depusă la Tribunalul Vaslui, în temeiul art. 302 C. proc. civ., de unde aceasta urma să fie înaintată instanței competente, potrivit legii în vigoare, la data la care a fost pronunțată.

Așa fiind, în mod greșit dosarul a fost înaintat Curții Supreme de Justiție, în raport cu dispozițiile procedurale sus invocate.

În consecință, se va trimite dosarul la instanța unde a fost înregistrată cererea de recurs, aceasta urmând să-l înainteze instanței competente, potrivit dispozițiilor procedurale anterioare datei de 28 august 2003.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

IN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Trimite cererea de recurs, formulată de S.A., împotriva sentinței civile nr. 852 din 12 iunie 2003, a Tribunalului Vaslui, la Tribunalul Vaslui.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi 29 septembrie 2003.