Admissibility of revision petition against filtering panel decision after unconstitutionality of underlying law
Romania (RO)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice, sitting as the Specialized Bench for the Uniformity of the Law, dismissed as inadmissible the request for a preliminary ruling on a legal question of uniformity. The dispute concerned the admissibility of a petition for revision (revizuire) against a decision rendered by a filtering panel (complet de filtru) that was not subject to appeal, specifically when the underlying constitutional provision had been declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court after the filtering decision was issued, potentially constituting a ground for revision under Article 509(1)(11) and Article 493(5) of the Civil Procedure Code. The court ruled that the issue was not a valid "question of right" suitable for uniformity purposes under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, thereby leaving the lower instance's procedural posture unresolved by this specific bench.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Admissibility of revision petition against filtering panel decision after unconstitutionality of underlying law: The dispute concerned the admissibility of a petition for revision (revizuire) against a decision rendered by a filtering panel (complet de filtru) that was not subject to appeal, specifically when the underlying constitutional provision had been declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court after the filtering decision was issued, potentially constituting a ground for revision under Article 509(1)(11) and Article 493(5) of the Civil Procedure Code. The court ruled that the issue was not a valid "question of right" suitable for uniformity purposes under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, thereby leaving the lower instance's procedural posture unresolved by this specific bench.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedCited as the procedural basis establishing that the decision of the Specialized Bench is obligatory and providing the framework for the ruling on the admissibility of the sesizare.
Full text
ROMÂNIA
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept
Minuta deciziei nr. 64 Dosar nr. 1648/1/2018
Şedinţa din 1 octombrie 2018
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE:
Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie – Secția a II-a civilă, în dosarul nr. 2644/1/2017, privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept: În interpretarea coroborată a dispoziţiilor art. 509 alin. (1) pct. 11 şi art. 493 alin. (5) din Codul de procedură civilă, este admisibilă cererea de revizuire a unei decizii pronunţate în completul de filtru, faţă de sintagma „nu este supusă niciunei căi de atac”, atunci când, în urma sesizării Curţii Constituţionale, s-a admis excepţia de neconstituţionalitate a textului de lege care a stat la baza soluţionării recursului, după pronunţarea hotărârii în completul de filtru, decizie care poate constitui temei de revizuire, conform textului şi jurisprudenţei Curţii Constituţionale?
Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.
Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 1 octombrie 2018.