Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_128095 AI generated

Preliminary ruling referral on cadastre fees inadmissible; no interpretation issued.

Case Number ICCJ_128095
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 rejected as inadmissible the referral from the Cluj Court of Appeal seeking a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Article 36(3)(a) of the Cadastre and Real Estate Publicity Law No. 7/1996, as in force on 15 July 2014; thus, no interpretation was issued and the appellate court's request was dismissed. The case arose from an administrative and fiscal dispute in which the referring court questioned the legal meaning of that provision, but the High Court found the referral inadmissible, without reaching the merits. The decision, binding under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, was rendered in a public hearing on 4 April 2016.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Preliminary ruling referral on cadastre fees inadmissible; no interpretation issued: 7/1996, as in force on 15 July 2014; thus, no interpretation was issued and the appellate court's request was dismissed. The case arose from an administrative and fiscal dispute in which the referring court questioned the legal meaning of that provision, but the High Court found the referral inadmissible, without reaching the merits. The decision, binding under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, was rendered in a public hearing on 4 April 2016.

Keywords

AI generated
preliminary ruling procedure preliminary decision fiscal law legal fees interpretation of the law real estate

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to state that the decision is binding.
AI generated
ICCJ_201038
Preliminary ruling referral inadmissible for lacking genuine interpretive difficulty; prior land restitution decisions stand.
Decizia nr. 65/2021
Preliminary ruling referral dismissed as inadmissible absent genuine interpretive question on appellate court composition.
ICCJ_185493
Land-referral deemed inadmissible; no interpretation of abandoned-land terms issued
ICCJ_137596
Inadmissible referral on preliminary question of law leaves legal issue unresolved
Decizia nr. 45/2021
Preliminary ruling referral deemed inadmissible for lacking formal statutory requirements.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to state that the decision is binding.

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. 10 Dosar nr. 602/1/2016

Şedinţa de la 4 aprilie 2016

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Cluj - Secţia a IlI-a contencios administrativ şi fiscal în dosarul nr. 796/117/2015*, pentru pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile privind interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 36 alin. (3) lit. a) din Legea cadastrului şi a publicităţii imobiliare nr. 7/1996, republicare 2, forma în vigoare la data de 15 iulie 2014.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi 4 aprilie 2016.