Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Încheierea nr. 349/2018 AI generated

Employee representative’s bias-based venue transfer request denied as unfounded.

Case Number Încheierea nr. 349/2018
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice denied as unfounded a request by an employee representative to transfer venue of a case pending before the Pitești Court of Appeal, ruling the request definitive and leaving the original case in that court. The request invoked Article 140 of the Civil Procedure Code, claiming legitimate suspicion of bias against the court, but the court found no such grounds existed.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 140 C. proc. civ; Employee representative’s bias-based venue transfer request denied as unfounded: The request invoked Article 140 of the Civil Procedure Code, claiming legitimate suspicion of bias against the court, but the court found no such grounds existed.

Keywords

AI generated
legitimate suspicion of bias grounds for cassation Civil Procedure Code e-justice action by staff referral for lack of jurisdiction

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 140 C. proc. civ
The provision is cited in the reasoning, but is not explicitly referenced in the dispositive orders.
AI generated
Încheierea nr. 5422/2012
Transfer of venue rejected as unfounded in bias claim.
Încheierea nr. 1721/2017
Transfer of venue denied; case stays at Alba Iulia Court of Appeal.
Încheierea nr. 347/2018
Transfer of venue denied for lack of legitimate suspicion of bias.
Încheierea nr. 1730/2014
Venue transfer request denied where alleged judicial bias targeted merits rather than impartiality under Art. 37(2) CPC
Sentința nr. 251/2013
Venue transfer denied for unsupported judicial bias claim; petitioner ordered to pay costs.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 140 C. proc. civ.

The provision is cited in the reasoning, but is not explicitly referenced in the dispositive orders.

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

Apreciind că nu există motive de bănuială legitimă, în sensul dispoziţiilor art. 140 C. proc. civ.,

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D I S P U N E

Respinge cererea formulată de A. - mandatar al salariaţilor SC "B." SRL privind strămutarea judecării cauzei ce formează obiectul Dosarului nr. x/109/2017 al Curţii de Apel Piteşti, secţia a II-a civilă, de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, ca nefondată.

Definitivă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 2 februarie 2018.