Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 7232/2004 AI generated

Administrative challenge to local council decision declared inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction and transferred to Court of Appeal

Case Number Decizia nr. 7232/2004
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 declared the appeal inadmissible due to lack of jurisdiction and ordered the case to be transferred to the Bacău Court of Appeal for competent resolution, thereby leaving the lower court's judgment on the merits pending further review. The dispute involved an administrative challenge by a private party against a local council and several individual members regarding the legality of a specific local council decision from 2001, which the first-instance tribunal had partially annulled as illegal. The decisive legal basis was procedural: under Article 299(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure and Law No. 29/1990, judgments in administrative litigation are subject only to appeal (recurs), which must be heard by the court immediately superior to the one that issued the initial judgment; since the challenged sentence was rendered by the Neamț Tribunal, the Supreme Court lacked competence and remanded the matter to the Bacău Court of Appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 299 (3) C. proc. civ; Administrative challenge to local council decision declared inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction and transferred to Court of Appeal: The dispute involved an administrative challenge by a private party against a local council and several individual members regarding the legality of a specific local council decision from 2001, which the first-instance tribunal had partially annulled as illegal. The decisive legal basis was procedural: under Article 299(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure and Law No. 29/1990, judgments in administrative litigation are subject only to appeal (recurs), which must be heard by the court immediately superior to the one that issued the initial judgment; since the challenged sentence was rendered by the Neamț Tribunal, the Supreme Court lacked competence and remanded the matter to the Bacău Court of Appeal.

Keywords

AI generated
challenge of administrative decisions jurisdictional matters cassation review transfer of competence procedural orders civil judgment

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 299 (3) C. proc. civ
Procedural rule applied to determine that the appeal against a first-instance decision in administrative litigation must be heard by the immediately superior court, leading to the referral of the case.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 3127/2020
Challenge to government decision on legality: rejected for lack of jurisdiction and referred to competent appellate court
Decizia nr. 6163/2005
Inadmissibility of challenge to court transfer order due to statutory prohibition of appeal
Decizia nr. 3016/2007
Inadmissibility of administrative challenge to judicial case transfer under transitional jurisdiction changes
Decizia nr. 290/2005
Jurisdictional Competence for Administrative Acts Issued by Territorial Authorities Following Hierarchical Appeal
Decizia nr. 999/2018
Recurs against tribunal's appellate ruling transferred to court of appeal for lack of High Court jurisdiction.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 299 (3) C. proc. civ.

Procedural rule applied to determine that the appeal against a first-instance decision in administrative litigation must be heard by the immediately superior court, leading to the referral of the case.

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

Asupra recursului de față;

Din examinarea lucrărilor din dosar, constată următoarele:

Prin sentința civilă nr. 116/2003, pronunțată de Tribunalul Neamț, secția comercială și de contencios administrativ, a fost admisă în parte, acțiunea reclamantei T.A., împotriva pârâților Consiliul Local Gîrcina județul Neamț, G.V., S.V., T.T., R.D., T.G., A.P., G.T., B.O., G.M., D.C. și E.C. și s-a dispus anularea hotărârii Consiliului Local nr. 44/2001. ca nelegală.

Împotriva acestei sentințe au declarat recurs. pârâții G.V., S.V., T.T., R.D., T.G., A.P., G.T., B.O., G.M. și D.C.

Înainte de a analiza motivele de recurs invocate, Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție a procedat la verificarea regularității sesizării și învestirii sale, constatând următoarele:

Recursul declarat este formulat împotriva unei sentințe pronunțate în primă instanță, de Tribunalul Neamț.

Potrivit dispozițiilor art. 299 (3) C. proc. civ., „În situațiile în care, potrivit dispozițiilor prezentului cod sau ale legii speciale, încheierile sau alte hotărâri pronunțate de instanțele de judecată, sunt supuse numai recursului, judecata acestei căi de atac este de competența instanței imediat superioare celui care a pronunțat hotărârea”.

Cum hotărârile pronunțate în contencios administrativ sunt supuse numai recursului, potrivit legii speciale în materie – Legea nr. 29/1990, sentința recurată fiind pronunțată de Tribunalul Neamț, recursul urmează a fi soluționat de Curtea de Apel Bacău ca instanță imediat superioară.

În consecință, având în vedere dispozițiile procedurale mai sus invocate, recursul urmează a fi trimis, Curții de Apel Bacău, ca instanță competentă în soluționarea sa.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Trimite cauza, spre competentă soluționare, la Curtea de Apel Bacău.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi 28 septembrie 2004.