Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_153040 AI generated

Reopening-confirmation rejection not a termination ground; preliminary referral inadmissible

Case Number ICCJ_153040
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 dismissed as inadmissible a referral from the Craiova Court of Appeal seeking a preliminary ruling on whether a final order by the preliminary chamber judge rejecting a request to confirm the reopening of criminal prosecution (under Article 335(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code) can be assimilated to a ground for terminating criminal proceedings under Article 16(1)(i) of the same Code. The referral was rejected on procedural admissibility grounds, so no substantive ruling was issued on the legal question; the decision is binding from its publication in the Official Gazette pursuant to Article 477(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 477 alin. (3) Codul de procedură penală; Reopening-confirmation rejection not a termination ground; preliminary referral inadmissible: The referral was rejected on procedural admissibility grounds, so no substantive ruling was issued on the legal question; the decision is binding from its publication in the Official Gazette pursuant to Article 477(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Keywords

AI generated
preliminary decision reopening of proceedings preliminary ruling procedure grounds for cassation referral order procedural issues

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 477 alin. (3) Codul de procedură penală
Basis for the mandatory effect of the decision (the High Court's preliminary ruling is binding from publication in the Official Gazette).
AI generated
ICCJ_87088
Inadmissible preliminary referral on renewed favorable criminal law application after prior rejection.
Decizia nr. 65/2021
Preliminary ruling referral dismissed as inadmissible absent genuine interpretive question on appellate court composition.
ICCJ_119954
Preliminary ruling referral by Court of Appeal rejected as inadmissible; no binding ruling on appellate nullity and retrial powers.
ICCJ_160747
Preliminary referral on recidivism rehabilitation timing dismissed as inadmissible, no substantive ruling issued.
Decizia nr. 17/2017
Preliminary ruling referral rejected as inadmissible due to prior binding precedent and lack of merit-determining effect.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 477 alin. (3) Codul de procedură penală

Basis for the mandatory effect of the decision (the High Court's preliminary ruling is binding from publication in the Official Gazette).

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

R O M Â N I A

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

COMPLETUL PENTRU DEZLEGAREA UNOR CHESTIUNI DE DREPT ÎN MATERIE PENALĂ

Minuta deciziei nr. 19 Dosar nr.1899/1/2019

Şedinţa din data de 29 octombrie 2019

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Craiova - Secția penală şi pentru cauze cu minori, în dosarul nr. 264/104/2017, prin care se solicită pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept: „În interpretarea dispoziţiilor art.16 alin.(1) lit.i) din Codul de procedură penală, încheierea definitivă pronunţată de judecătorul de cameră preliminară, prevăzută de art.335 alin.(4) din Codul de procedură, prin care s-a respins cererea de confirmare a redeschiderii urmăririi penale, poate fi asimilată cauzei de încetare a procesului penal?”

Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art.477 alin.(3) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 29 octombrie 2019.