Preliminary ruling referral on lapse during mandatory stay inadmissible; question left unresolved.

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the referral from the Bucharest Tribunal, Sixth Civil Section, seeking a preliminary ruling on whether the provisions on lapse of proceedings (art. 416(1) Civil Procedure Code) apply during a mandatory stay under art. 64(4), and whether resumption occurs by party request or ex officio after the appellate decision; thus, no ruling was given on the merits, and the referring court's question remains unresolved. The dispute arose in a civil case (docket no. 34079/303/2015) where the tribunal, faced with a legal interpretation issue, sought guidance under the preliminary ruling procedure. The High Court based its decision on the inadmissibility of the referral, applying procedural rules governing referrals for preliminary rulings (art. 521(3) Civil Procedure Code), determining that the question did not meet the statutory requirements for such a referral. The decision is binding pursuant to art. 521(3) Civil Procedure Code.