Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_139307 AI generated

Inadmissibility of preliminary reference on signature requirements for executory force of distance credit contracts

Case Number ICCJ_139307
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 rejected as inadmissible a preliminary reference submitted by the Bucharest Court of Appeal regarding the interpretation of Article 666(5) points 2-4 of the Code of Civil Procedure in relation to Government Emergency Ordinance No. 85/2004. The dispute centered on whether the signature of the debtor was still required for the valid conclusion of a distance credit contract or if the mere receipt of a confirmation message by the consumer was sufficient to confer enforceability (executory title status) on the contract. The decision, which is mandatory for all lower courts, was issued on January 22, 2018, leaving the lower court to resolve the specific procedural requirements without a unified judicial interpretation on the necessity of signatures in electronic or distance credit agreements.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Inadmissibility of preliminary reference on signature requirements for executory force of distance credit contracts: 85/2004. The dispute centered on whether the signature of the debtor was still required for the valid conclusion of a distance credit contract or if the mere receipt of a confirmation message by the consumer was sufficient to confer enforceability (executory title status) on the contract. The decision, which is mandatory for all lower courts, was issued on January 22, 2018, leaving the lower court to resolve the specific procedural requirements without a unified judicial interpretation on the necessity of signatures in electronic or distance credit agreements.

Keywords

AI generated
signature requirement reference for a preliminary ruling distance contract electronic signature contract interpretation Civil Procedure Code

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory for lower courts.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 7/2018
Distance credit contracts: enforceability without debtor signature and preliminary reference admissibility under Article 519 CPC
ICCJ_156022
Enforceability of distance-concluded financial service contracts lacking debtor's signature
Decizia nr. 30/2019
Admissibility of preliminary reference on multi-credit mortgage settlement under Law 77/2016
ICCJ_219202
Inadmissibility of reference on admissibility and reduction of execution delay penalties under Art. 906 of the Civil Procedure Code
Decizia nr. 28/2020
Admissibility of preliminary ruling on conflict between private signature enforcement registration and special credit contract titling norms

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory 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. 7 Dosar nr. 2506/1/2017

Şedinţa din 22 ianuarie 2018

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Bucureşti - Secţia a III-a civilă, în dosarul nr. 1256/303/2017, pentru pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la modalitatea de interpretare a dispoziţiilor art. 666 alin. (5) pct. 2, 3, 4 din Codul de procedură civilă prin raportare la art. 8 din Ordonanţa Guvernului nr. 85/2004, respectiv de a stabili dacă, pentru încheierea valabilă a unui contract la distanţă, nu mai este necesară semnătura olografă sau electronică a debitorului, primirea mesajului de confirmare de către consumator, referitor la comanda sa, fiind suficientă pentru încheierea valabilă a contractului, deci pentru a conferi valoare de titlu executoriu contractului de credit încheiat în această modalitate.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 22 ianuarie 2018.