Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_130774 AI generated

Conflict between administrative litigation deadlines under Law No. 554/2004 and special restitution deadlines under Law No. 165/2013

Case Number ICCJ_130774
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 (Complet for resolving legal questions) issued a mandatory decision in a preliminary reference, establishing that the administrative courts' deadlines under Article 24(1) of Law No. 554/2004 remain applicable and are not superseded by the specific deadlines in Article 32 of Law No. 165/2013. The dispute concerned a conflict regarding procedural timelines in administrative litigation related to the restitution of properties abnormally appropriated during the communist regime, where the lower court sought clarification on which statutory provision governs. The decisive legal basis was the interpretation of the interplay between the general administrative procedural code (Law No. 554/2004) and the special law on property restitution (Law No. 165/2013), with the court ruling that the general procedural deadlines of the former take precedence over the latter for the specific procedural aspects in question.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 32 din Legea nr. 165/2013, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Conflict between administrative litigation deadlines under Law No. 554/2004 and special restitution deadlines under Law No. 165/2013: 554/2004 remain applicable and are not superseded by the specific deadlines in Article 32 of Law No. 165/2013. The dispute concerned a conflict regarding procedural timelines in administrative litigation related to the restitution of properties abnormally appropriated during the communist regime, where the lower court sought clarification on which statutory provision governs. The decisive legal basis was the interpretation of the interplay between the general administrative procedural code (Law No. 554/2004) and the special law on property restitution (Law No. 165/2013), with the court ruling that the general procedural deadlines of the former take precedence over the latter for the specific procedural aspects in question.

Keywords

AI generated
restitution of property statutory deadlines legal aspects procedural issues reference for a preliminary ruling interpretation of the law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 32 din Legea nr. 165/2013
554/2004, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, trebuie să se ţină seama de termenele prevăzute de acest articol, nu şi de cele reglementate de art. 32 din Legea nr.
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the court's mandatory decision.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 2717/2021
Jurisdictional conflict over civil versus administrative review of property restitution compensation monetization deadlines under Law 165/2013
Decizia nr. 85/2018
Post-deadline suit for property restitution under Law No. 165/2013: character of the six-month statutory deadline and survival of substantive rights
Decizia nr. 45/2019
Scope of application of the six-month forfeiture deadline for direct restitution claims versus actions to compel administrative resolution of property notifications
ICCJ_146169
Admissibility of preliminary ruling on post-deadline statute of limitations for restitution claims under Law No. 165/2013
Decizia nr. 2320/2017
Failure of property restitution authority to resolve administrative contestation within statutory deadline; judicial obligation to compel administrative decision under Law 554/2004

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the court's mandatory 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. 35 Dosar nr. 2200/1/2016

Şedinţa de la 31 octombrie 2016

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite sesizarea privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile, formulată de Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie – Secţia de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, prin încheierea din 22 martie 2016, pronunţată în dosarul nr. 24103/3/2013 şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În interpretarea şi aplicarea dispoziţiilor art. 24 alin. (1) din Legea contenciosului administrativ nr. 554/2004, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, trebuie să se ţină seama de termenele prevăzute de acest articol, nu şi de cele reglementate de art. 32 din Legea nr. 165/2013 privind măsurile pentru finalizarea procesului de restituire, în natură sau prin echivalent, a imobilelor preluate în mod abuziv în perioada regimului comunist în România, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţa publică din data de 31 octombrie 2016.