Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_133349 AI generated

Annulment appeal cannot relitigate termination ground already settled on appeal

Case Number ICCJ_133349
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 and ruled, in a preliminary ruling for the interpretation of law, that a court hearing an "appeal for annulment" under Article 426 lit. b) of the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code may not re-examine a ground for termination of criminal proceedings when the appellate court had already debated and analyzed the applicability of that ground based on evidence in the case file. The decision is binding from its publication in the Official Gazette of Romania, pursuant to Article 477(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The dispute concerned whether, after the preliminary admission of such an annulment appeal, the court could re-litigate a termination ground (e.g., prescription) that was previously addressed on the merits in the appellate phase; the court held that the annulment procedure cannot be used to reopen issues already settled on appeal, thereby prevailing in favor of the finality of the appellate judgment. The legal basis is Article 426 lit. b) of the Criminal Procedure Code, interpreted restrictively to prevent a second substantive review of termination grounds.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 426 lit. b) din Codul de procedură penală, art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Annulment appeal cannot relitigate termination ground already settled on appeal: b) of the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code may not re-examine a ground for termination of criminal proceedings when the appellate court had already debated and analyzed the applicability of that ground based on evidence in the case file. The decision is binding from its publication in the Official Gazette of Romania, pursuant to Article 477(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The dispute concerned whether, after the preliminary admission of such an annulment appeal, the court could re-litigate a termination ground (e.g., prescription) that was previously addressed on the merits in the appellate phase; the court held that the annulment procedure cannot be used to reopen issues already settled on appeal, thereby prevailing in favor of the finality of the appellate judgment. The legal basis is Article 426 lit. b) of the Criminal Procedure Code, interpreted restrictively to prevent a second substantive review of termination grounds.

Keywords

AI generated
annulment proceedings preliminary ruling procedure grounds for cassation preliminary decision ground for review reopening of proceedings

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 426 lit. b) din Codul de procedură penală
Main legal provision interpreted in the decision; used to establish that the court hearing the contestation cannot re-analyse a ground for ending the criminal proceedings already examined in appeal.
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală
Basis for declaring the decision mandatory from the date of publication in the Official Gazette.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 828/2003
Retraction of waiver of appeal not a valid ground for annulment due to restrictive statutory grounds of Art. 317 Civil Procedure Code
Decizia nr. 1994/2005
Inadmissibility of annulment appeal for failure to invoke statutory grounds under Art. 386 C. proc. pen.
Decizia nr. 1659/2011
Annulment granted, prior decision annulled for failure to examine appeal grounds; retrial ordered on merits.
Decizia nr. 2577/2021
Contestație în anulare inadmisibilă: lipsa motivelor de retragere și nepermisitatea reanalizării fondului sau a probelor noi
Decizia nr. 1768/2024
Appeals against annulment and correction rulings held inadmissible as same appeal route as final underlying decision.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 426 lit. b) din Codul de procedură penală

Main legal provision interpreted in the decision; used to establish that the court hearing the contestation cannot re-analyse a ground for ending the criminal proceedings already examined in appeal.

art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală

Basis for declaring the decision mandatory from the date of publication in the Official Gazette.

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

R O M Â N I A

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

COMPLETUL PENTRU DEZLEGAREA UNOR CHESTIUNI DE DREPT ÎN MATERIE PENALĂ

Minuta deciziei nr.10 Dosar nr. 148/1/2017

Ședința din data de 29 martie 2017

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel București – Secția I Penală în dosarul nr.6664/2/2016, prin care se solicită pronunțarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea chestiunii de drept: „Dacă, în interpretarea dispozițiilor art. 426 lit. b) din Codul de procedură penală, instanța care soluționează contestația în anulare, după admiterea în principiu a acesteia, poate reanaliza o cauză de încetare a procesului penal, în cazul în care instanța de apel a dezbătut și a analizat incidența cauzei de încetare a procesului penal, pentru care existau probe la dosar”.

Stabilește că, în interpretarea dispozițiilor art. 426 lit. b) din Codul de procedură penală, instanța care soluționează contestația în anulare nu poate reanaliza o cauză de încetare a procesului penal, în cazul în care instanța de apel a dezbătut și a analizat incidența cauzei de încetare a procesului penal.

Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 29 martie 2017.