Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_122505 AI generated

Scope of devolutive effect: whether specifying implicit claims on appeal modifies the subject matter or permits raising new material incompetence exceptions

Case Number ICCJ_122505
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) Plenary Panel admitted the referral from the Vâlcea Tribunal, ruling that the specification of implicit claims on appeal under Article 478(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure does not constitute a modification of the trial's subject matter or a derogation from Articles 478(1) and (3), but requires the correct delimitation of the first-instance judgment's limits; the court simultaneously dismissed as inadmissible the second referral regarding the interplay between Articles 130(2) and 131 concerning the raising of material incompetence exceptions within the devolutive effect limits of an appeal. The dispute concerned procedural law, specifically the extent of the devolutive effect of appeals and the admissibility of objections regarding the scope of the case. The decisive legal basis is Article 478 of the Code of Civil Procedure, where the court clarified that specifying implicit claims does not expand the appeal beyond the devolutive effect, while finding the referral on incompetence exceptions inadmissible under the rules for preliminary decisions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 478 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Scope of devolutive effect: whether specifying implicit claims on appeal modifies the subject matter or permits raising new material incompetence exceptions: The dispute concerned procedural law, specifically the extent of the devolutive effect of appeals and the admissibility of objections regarding the scope of the case. The decisive legal basis is Article 478 of the Code of Civil Procedure, where the court clarified that specifying implicit claims does not expand the appeal beyond the devolutive effect, while finding the referral on incompetence exceptions inadmissible under the rules for preliminary decisions.

Keywords

AI generated
devolutive effect effects of a preliminary ruling preliminary ruling procedure effects, scope and limits article of civil procedure matter in dispute

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 478 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
The provision directly justifying the interpretation that specifying implicit claims on appeal does not modify the subject matter of the trial.
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature and binding effect of the court's decision.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 28/2015
Scope of implicit claims in appeal under Art. 478(4) CPC and inadmissibility of raising material incompetence exception in appellate review
ICCJ_86849
Limits of devolutive effect in appeal: prohibition on ex officio review of private-order procedural norms as grounds for nullity
Decizia nr. 1984/2022
Limits of appellate devolutive effect regarding new defenses and exclusion of factual re-evaluation in cassation
ICCJ_82425
Limits of devolutive effect of appeal prohibiting modification of essential elements of civil action
Decizia nr. 440/2023
Improper alteration of procedural framework and object of claims during appeal violates devolutive limits

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 478 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă

The provision directly justifying the interpretation that specifying implicit claims on appeal does not modify the subject matter of the trial.

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature and binding effect of the court's decision.

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

ROMÂNIA

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept

Minuta deciziei nr. 28 Dosar nr. 1924/1/2015

Şedinţa din 21 septembrie 2015

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Vâlcea - Secţia I civilă, în dosarul nr. 13501/288/2013 şi, în consecinţă:

În interpretarea şi aplicarea dispoziţiilor art. 478 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă, stabileşte că explicitarea pretenţiilor implicite în apel nu are semnificaţia modificării cadrului procesual sub aspectul obiectului judecăţii şi a derogării de la dispoziţiile alin. (1) şi (3) ale aceluiaşi articol, dar presupune corecta lămurire a limitelor judecăţii în prima instanţă.

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea modului de interpretare şi aplicare a dispoziţiilor art.130 alin. (2) şi art. 131 din Codul de procedură civilă, în sensul de a se stabili dacă se poate invoca excepţia necompetenţei materiale în limitele efectului devolutiv al judecării unei cauze, în apel.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 21 septembrie 2015.