Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_126963 AI generated

Salary re-establishment timing set for personnel under own-revenue-funded institutions after collective agreement expires.

Case Number ICCJ_126963
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the referral requests and issued a preliminary ruling (mandatory under Art. 521(3) Civil Procedure Code) interpreting Art. 2(2) of Emergency Ordinance No. 19/2012, as approved by Law No. 182/2012, regarding the recovery of salary reductions. The Court held that, for personnel of public authorities and institutions financed entirely from own revenues and subordinate to or under the authority, coordination, or control of the Government, ministries, other central/local specialized bodies, the Prime Minister, or Parliament, salaries are to be set according to Annex VIII of Framework Law No. 284/2010 from the date the collective labor agreement in force at the time the ordinance entered into force expires. The dispute arose from two civil cases referred by the Constanța Court of Appeal concerning the proper timing and legal basis for re-establishing salary levels after the lifting of emergency salary reduction measures, with the decisive legal issue being the interpretation of the ordinance's transitional provisions in relation to the expiration of existing collective bargaining agreements.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Salary re-establishment timing set for personnel under own-revenue-funded institutions after collective agreement expires: 521(3) Civil Procedure Code) interpreting Art. 2(2) of Emergency Ordinance No. 19/2012, as approved by Law No. 182/2012, regarding the recovery of salary reductions. The Court held that, for personnel of public authorities and institutions financed entirely from own revenues and subordinate to or under the authority, coordination, or control of the Government, ministries, other central/local specialized bodies, the Prime Minister, or Parliament, salaries are to be set according to Annex VIII of Framework Law No. 284/2010 from the date the collective labor agreement in force at the time the ordinance entered into force expires. The dispute arose from two civil cases referred by the Constanța Court of Appeal concerning the proper timing and legal basis for re-establishing salary levels after the lifting of emergency salary reduction measures, with the decisive legal issue being the interpretation of the ordinance's transitional provisions in relation to the expiration of existing collective bargaining agreements.

Keywords

AI generated
collective bargaining reduction of salary emergency government ordinance framework decision transitional justice public-law institution

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural rule cited to declare the ruling mandatory.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 2/2016
Effective date of statutory salary framework application versus expired collective bargaining agreements in self-financed public institutions
Decizia nr. 2287/2015
Eligibility of public officials for collective labor agreement termination compensation in absence of statutory salary regulation
Decizia nr. 1054/2024
Salary retroactivity capped at three years as administrative salary decision upheld.
Decizia nr. 5581/2013
Recovery of salaries paid to public officeholders after constitutional invalidation of management contracts
Decizia nr. 3592/2015
Retroactive salary correction and the limits of acquired rights in public sector reclassification

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 2 alin. 2 din Ordonanţa de urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 19/2012 privind aprobarea unor măsuri pentru recuperarea reducerilor salariale, aprobată de Legea nr. 182/2012, cu modificările ulterioare

Main ground for the decision: the Court interpreted this provision in its preliminary ruling.

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

Procedural rule cited to declare the ruling mandatory.

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. 2 Dosar nr. 4112/1/2015

Şedinţa din 15 februarie 2016

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite sesizările formulate de Curtea de Apel Constanţa - Secţia I civilă în dosarele nr. 4027/118/2014 şi nr. 5854/118/2014 privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile şi, în consecinţă :

În interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 2 alin. 2 din Ordonanţa de urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 19/2012 privind aprobarea unor măsuri pentru recuperarea reducerilor salariale, aprobată de Legea nr. 182/2012, cu modificările ulterioare, salariile personalului din autorităţile şi instituţiile publice finanţate integral din venituri proprii, aflate în subordinea, sub autoritatea, în coordonarea Guvernului, ministerelor şi a celorlalte organe de specialitate ale administraţiei publice centrale şi locale, precum şi din cele aflate în coordonarea primului-ministru şi cele aflate sub controlul Parlamentului se stabilesc potrivit Anexei nr. VIII la Legea-cadru nr. 284/2010 privind salarizarea unitară a personalului plătit din fonduri publice, cu modificările ulterioare, de la data expirării perioadei de valabilitate prevăzută în contractul colectiv de muncă aflat în derulare la momentul intrării în vigoare a Ordonanţei de urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 19/2012 privind aprobarea unor măsuri pentru recuperarea reducerilor salariale, aprobată de Legea nr. 182/2012, cu modificările ulterioare.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 15 februarie 2016.