Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 166/2017 AI generated

Transfer request based on legitimate suspicion remitted to Court of Appeal Ploiești for lack of material jurisdiction

Case Number Decizia nr. 166/2017
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 admitted the exception of its own material incompetence and referred the case to the Court of Appeal Ploiești, which is the competent court to decide the request to transfer (strămutare) the file pending before the Pucioasa District Court. The request was based on legitimate suspicion, filed after the entry into force of the new Civil Procedure Code; the Court applied Article 142(1) of that Code, which states that a transfer request based on legitimate suspicion is within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal when the lower court is a district court or tribunal within its circuit, read together with Article 24. The Court ordered that costs be decided by the court that ultimately resolves the transfer request. The decision is final.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 142 alin. (1) Cod procedură civilă, Art. 24 Cod procedură civilă; Transfer request based on legitimate suspicion remitted to Court of Appeal Ploiești for lack of material jurisdiction: The request was based on legitimate suspicion, filed after the entry into force of the new Civil Procedure Code; the Court applied Article 142(1) of that Code, which states that a transfer request based on legitimate suspicion is within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal when the lower court is a district court or tribunal within its circuit, read together with Article 24. The Court ordered that costs be decided by the court that ultimately resolves the transfer request. The decision is final.

Keywords

AI generated
lack of jurisdiction article of civil procedure e-justice detention for transfer transfer of tenancy urgent suspicion of an offence

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 142 alin. (1) Cod procedură civilă
Basis for declining jurisdiction because the request for transfer of case is within the competence of the court of appeal when the court from which transfer is sought is a lower court.
Art. 24 Cod procedură civilă
Applied to determine the applicability of the new procedural code to the request filed after its entry into force.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 989/2017
Transfer request for legitimate suspicion sent to appellate court over High Court for lack of material competence.
Decizia nr. 1284/2019
Transfer request over legitimate suspicion sent to court of appeal; High Court declines jurisdiction on material incompetence
Decizia nr. 1358/2016
Transfer request on legitimate suspicion referred to competent court of appeal; ancillary requests left unruled.
Decizia nr. 1376/2021
Transfer request for legitimate suspicion referred to Bacău Court of Appeal on material competence grounds
Decizia nr. 347/2019
Transfer request for legitimate suspicion sent to Ploiești Court of Appeal as competent forum.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 142 alin. (1) Cod procedură civilă

Basis for declining jurisdiction because the request for transfer of case is within the competence of the court of appeal when the court from which transfer is sought is a lower court.

Art. 24 Cod procedură civilă

Applied to determine the applicability of the new procedural code to the request filed after its entry into force.

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

Decizia nr. 166/2017

Constatând că se solicită strămutarea Dosarului nr. x/283/2016 al Judecătoriei Pucioasa, având ca obiect o acțiune formulată după data intrării în vigoare a Noului C. proc. civ., în considerarea dispozițiilor art. 142 alin. (1) din același act normativ, potrivit cărora "cererea de strămutare întemeiată pe motiv de bănuială legitimă este de competența curții de apel, dacă instanța de la care se cere strămutarea este o judecătorie sau un tribunal din circumscripția acesteia", raportat și la dispozițiile art. 24 din același cod, urmează să decline competența de soluționare a cererii formulate de petentul A., privind strămutarea judecării cauzei ce formează obiectul Dosarului nr. x/283/2016 al Judecătoriei Pucioasa, instanței competente, respectiv Curții de Apel Ploiești.

Cu privire la cererea de acordare a cheltuielilor de judecată se va pronunța instanța în favoarea căreia s-a stabilit competența de soluționare a cererii de strămutare, motiv pentru care,

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Admite excepția necompetenței materiale a Înaltei Curți de Casație și Justiție privind soluționarea cererii formulate de petentul A. de strămutare a judecării procesului ce formează obiectul Dosarului nr. x/283/2016 al Judecătoriei Pucioasa.

Trimite cauza spre competentă soluționare Curții de Apel Ploiești.

Definitivă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi 1 februarie 2017.

Procesat de GGC - N