Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 1829/2008 AI generated

Lease recognition appeal dismissed as time-barred under 15-day filing deadline

Case Number Decizia nr. 1829/2008
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed the claimant’s appeal (recurs) as time-barred, affirming the Court of Appeal’s decision, which itself had upheld the trial court’s dismissal of the claimant’s action seeking a declaration that a lease relationship existed with the local council; the appellate decision communicated on 27 July 2006 remained final and irrevocable. The underlying dispute was a commercial and administrative case where the claimant sought judicial recognition of a lease against the municipality and a company, but had lost at both the Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. The decisive legal basis was the mandatory 15-day appeal deadline under Articles 301 and 303(1) of the Civil Procedure Code, computed from communication of the decision, which expired on 11 August 2006; the appeal filed on 17 April 2007 exceeded the deadline, triggering forfeiture (decădere) under Article 103(1), with the court able to raise the tardiness exception of its own motion.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 103 alin. (1) C. proc. civ, art. 301 C. proc. civ, art. 303 alin. (1) C. proc. civ; Lease recognition appeal dismissed as time-barred under 15-day filing deadline: The underlying dispute was a commercial and administrative case where the claimant sought judicial recognition of a lease against the municipality and a company, but had lost at both the Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. The decisive legal basis was the mandatory 15-day appeal deadline under Articles 301 and 303(1) of the Civil Procedure Code, computed from communication of the decision, which expired on 11 August 2006; the appeal filed on 17 April 2007 exceeded the deadline, triggering forfeiture (decădere) under Article 103(1), with the court able to raise the tardiness exception of its own motion.

Keywords

AI generated
late filing deadline for communication civil dispute expiry of lease administrative dismissal late objection to debt enforcement

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 103 alin. (1) C. proc. civ
Establishes the forfeiture of the right to exercise the appeal when the statutory deadline is missed, justifying the dismissal.
art. 301 C. proc. civ
Cites the deadline for filing an appeal, which was exceeded, leading to the appeal being dismissed as late.
art. 303 alin. (1) C. proc. civ
Sets the time limit for filing the appeal, which was not respected, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as tardive.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 4431/2012
Lease termination appeal dismissed as time-barred; late fax filing outside registry hours invalidates 15-day deadline
Decizia nr. 2498/2011
Lease termination and rent arrears; cassation appeal inadmissible due to expiration of mandatory filing deadline
Decizia nr. 3931/2021
Appeal dismissed as time-barred for filing 3 days after mandatory 15-day deadline.
Decizia nr. 85/2015
Lease contract termination and reconventional eviction appeal dismissed as time-barred

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 301 C. proc. civ.

Cites the deadline for filing an appeal, which was exceeded, leading to the appeal being dismissed as late.

art. 303 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Sets the time limit for filing the appeal, which was not respected, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as tardive.

art. 103 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Establishes the forfeiture of the right to exercise the appeal when the statutory deadline is missed, justifying the dismissal.

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

Asupra recursului de faţă;

Din examinarea lucrărilor din dosar, constată următoarele:

Prin sentinţa civilă nr. 1619 din 13 decembrie 2005, Tribunalul Arad, secţia comercială şi de contencios administrativ, respinge excepţia necompetenţei materiale a Tribunalului Arad invocată de către reclamanta SC S.B. SRL BUCUREŞTI.

Respinge excepţia autorităţii de lucru judecat invocată de către pârâta SC R. SA.

Respinge acţiunea civilă exercitată de către reclamanta SC S.B. SRL BUCUREŞTI, în contradictoriu cu pârâţii C.L. ARAD şi SC R. SA ARAD, având ca obiect constatarea existenţei unui raport de locaţiune între reclamantă şi C.L.M. ARAD.

Curtea de Apel Timişoara, secţia comercială şi de contencios administrativ, prin decizia nr. 152/ A din 22 iunie 2006.

Respinge apelul declarat de reclamanta SC S.B. SRL BUCUREŞTI împotriva sentinţei civile nr. 1619 din 13 decembrie 2005 pronunţată de Tribunalul Arad din dosarul nr. 3319/2005 în contradictoriu cu pârâţii intimaţi C.L. ARAD şi SC R. SA ARAD.

Împotriva acestei ultime hotărâri a declarat recurs reclamanta SC S.B. SRL BUCUREŞTI criticând-o pentru nelegalitate şi netemeinicie.

Recursul este tardiv şi urmează a se respinge cu această menţiune.

Din examinarea actelor şi lucrărilor dosarului rezultă că recurentei-reclamante SC S.B. SRL BUCUREŞTI i s-a comunicat decizia instanţei de apel la data de 27 iulie 2006.

Recursul însă, s-a înregistrat la data de 17 aprilie 2007, deci peste termenul prevăzut de lege la art. 301 şi 303 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Termenul de recurs având caracter imperativ, nerespectarea acestuia atrage potrivit art. 103 alin. (1) C. proc. civ., decăderea părţii din dreptul de a exercita această cale de atac; excepţia de tardivitate putând fi invocată de orice parte interesată, precum şi de instanţă, din oficiu.

În cauză termenul defipt de lege s-a împlinit la 11 august 2006 aşa încât recursul reclamantei este tardiv şi va fi respins ca atare.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Respinge, ca tardiv, recursul declarat de reclamanta SC S.B. SRL BUCUREŞTI împotriva deciziei nr. 152/ A din 22 iunie 2006 a Curţii de Apel Timişoara, secţia comercială şi de contencios administrativ.

Irevocabilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi 28 mai 2008.