Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_134867 AI generated

Presumption of legitimate interest for land fund claims initiated by mayors under Law No. 169/1997

Case Number ICCJ_134867
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 filed by the Gorj Tribunal and established that, in proceedings initiated by the mayor acting as president of the local land fund commission under Article III(1) of Law No. 169/1997 (amending Law No. 18/1991), the requirement of "legitimate interest" stipulated in Article III(2) of the same act is presumed; this decision is mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The case involved a procedural challenge regarding the admissibility of claims related to the nationalization of urban land assets, specifically focusing on whether the administrative body required to prove a specific legitimate interest to file such claims. The court's ruling resolved the legal question by interpreting the legislative framework to automatically satisfy the standing requirement for the local commission in these specific restitution or compensation contexts, thereby facilitating the progression of such civil actions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. III alin. (1) din Legea nr. 169/1997, art. III alin. (2) din Legea nr. 169/1997, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Presumption of legitimate interest for land fund claims initiated by mayors under Law No. 169/1997: 169/1997 (amending Law No. 18/1991), the requirement of "legitimate interest" stipulated in Article III(2) of the same act is presumed; this decision is mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The case involved a procedural challenge regarding the admissibility of claims related to the nationalization of urban land assets, specifically focusing on whether the administrative body required to prove a specific legitimate interest to file such claims. The court's ruling resolved the legal question by interpreting the legislative framework to automatically satisfy the standing requirement for the local commission in these specific restitution or compensation contexts, thereby facilitating the progression of such civil actions.

Keywords

AI generated
land law legal presumption related proceedings article of civil procedure restitution and compensation assets

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. III alin. (1) din Legea nr. 169/1997
Cited in the dispositive to define the legal basis of the claim filed by the mayor as president of the local land fund commission.
art. III alin. (2) din Legea nr. 169/1997
Cited in the dispositive to establish that the requirement of legitimate interest is presumed in the specific context of the claim.
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the decision for lower courts.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 51/2017
Presumption of legitimate interest for mayors in land fund nullity actions under Law 169/1997
Decizia nr. 3281/2010
Competence of local land fund commission over mayor in restitution claims under Law No. 18/1991 despite prior adjudication under Law No. 10/2001
Decizia nr. 3771/2017
Conflict of interest in municipal land concession: validity of integrity report and non-retroactivity of legislative amendments
Decizia nr. 3422/2003
Standing of local government body in property restitution: validity of suing the City Council versus the Mayor as defendant
Decizia nr. 108/2016
Procedural interest of sectoral mayor to challenge nullity of property restitution order for public utility violations

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. III alin. (1) din Legea nr. 169/1997

Cited in the dispositive to define the legal basis of the claim filed by the mayor as president of the local land fund commission.

art. III alin. (2) din Legea nr. 169/1997

Cited in the dispositive to establish that the requirement of legitimate interest is presumed in the specific context of the claim.

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the decision for lower courts.

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. 51 Dosar nr. 487/1/2017

Ședința din 3 iulie 2017

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Gorj - Secţia I civilă, în dosarul nr. 2058/318/2016 şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În cazul cererii formulate de primar, în calitate de preşedinte al comisiei locale de fond funciar, în temeiul art. III alin. (1) din Legea nr. 169/1997 pentru modificarea şi completarea Legii fondului funciar nr. 18/1991, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, cerinţa “interesului legitim”, prevăzută de art. III alin. (2) din acelaşi act normativ, este prezumată.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 3 iulie 2017.