Scope of statutory alienation prohibition on subsidized housing and its bar against compulsory execution by unsecured creditors
Romania (RO)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court of Cassation and Justice issued a mandatory binding interpretation, ruling in favor of the interpretation sought by the referring High Court, that the five-year prohibition on alienation of first-home program properties under Emergency Government Ordinance No. 60/2009 prevents such real estate from being subject to compulsory execution initiated by unsecured creditors, as these assets remain alienable only conditional upon the consent of the Ministry of Public Finance and the financing bank. The dispute concerned the legal scope of the statutory interdict on alienation and its intersection with civil enforcement procedures, specifically whether creditors could seize and sell such protected properties without the required administrative and financial approvals. The decisive legal basis was Article 1, paragraph (7) of Emergency Government Ordinance No. 60/2009, approved and amended by Law No. 368/2009, interpreted in conjunction with the procedural mandate for preliminary rulings under Article 521, paragraph (3) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Scope of statutory alienation prohibition on subsidized housing and its bar against compulsory execution by unsecured creditors: 60/2009 prevents such real estate from being subject to compulsory execution initiated by unsecured creditors, as these assets remain alienable only conditional upon the consent of the Ministry of Public Finance and the financing bank. The dispute concerned the legal scope of the statutory interdict on alienation and its intersection with civil enforcement procedures, specifically whether creditors could seize and sell such protected properties without the required administrative and financial approvals. The decisive legal basis was Article 1, paragraph (7) of Emergency Government Ordinance No. 60/2009, approved and amended by Law No. 368/2009, interpreted in conjunction with the procedural mandate for preliminary rulings under Article 521, paragraph (3) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedCited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory for the referring court.
Full text
ROMÂNIA
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept
Minuta deciziei nr. 32 Dosar nr. 4150/1/2016
Şedinţa din 15 mai 2017
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE:
Admite sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Bucureşti - Secţia a IV-a civilă, în dosarul nr. 27.932/303/2015, privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:
Sintagma „interdicţia de înstrăinare a locuinţei pe o perioadă de 5 ani”, cuprinsă în prevederile art. 1 alin. (7) din Ordonanţa de urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 60/2009 privind unele măsuri în vederea implementării programului „Prima casă”, aprobată cu modificări şi completări prin Legea nr. 368/2009, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, se interpretează în sensul că imobilele asupra cărora este instituită interdicţia de înstrăinare nu pot face obiectul unei executări silite pornite la cererea unor creditori chirografari, fiind alienabile condiţionat de acordul Ministerului Finanţelor Publice şi al băncii finanţatoare.
Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.
Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi 15 mai 2017.