Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_156001 AI generated

Status of registered individual psychology practice as commercial entity for non-custodial measure execution

Case Number ICCJ_156001
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 the preliminary reference question submitted by the Dolj District Court, thereby upholding the procedural requirement that no binding interpretation on the specific legal issue was issued. The dispute concerned the interpretation of Article 20(1) of Law No. 253/2013 on the execution of non-custodial measures, specifically whether an individual psychology practice registered under Law No. 213/2004 qualifies as an "association, foundation, or commercial company" within the scope of Article 21 of the same law, potentially affecting the provider's eligibility or treatment under penal execution regulations. The court’s decision relied on the procedural provisions of Article 477(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to determine the admissibility of the preliminary reference, resulting in the refusal to rule on the substantive legal interpretation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 20 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 253/2013, art. 21 din Legea nr. 253/2013, art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Status of registered individual psychology practice as commercial entity for non-custodial measure execution: The dispute concerned the interpretation of Article 20(1) of Law No. 253/2013 on the execution of non-custodial measures, specifically whether an individual psychology practice registered under Law No. 213/2004 qualifies as an "association, foundation, or commercial company" within the scope of Article 21 of the same law, potentially affecting the provider's eligibility or treatment under penal execution regulations. The court’s decision relied on the procedural provisions of Article 477(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to determine the admissibility of the preliminary reference, resulting in the refusal to rule on the substantive legal interpretation.

Keywords

AI generated
legal entity code of criminal procedure commercial register preliminary decision procedural issues interpretation of the law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 20 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 253/2013
„În interpretarea art. 20 alin.
art. 21 din Legea nr. 253/2013
213/2004 privind exercitarea profesiei de psiholog cu drept de liberă practică, înființarea, organizarea şi funcționarea Colegiului Psihologilor din România, cu modificările ulterioare, constituie asociație, fundație sau societate comercială dintre cele prevăzute de art. 21 din Legea nr. 253/2013 ?”
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală
Cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory, applying the procedural rule for the binding nature of the judgment.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 6/2020
Individual psychology office referral on habilitation eligibility rejected as inadmissible
ICCJ_84295
Standing of private legal entities to challenge prosecutorial non-referral under Art. 278(1) CPP and ECHR Art. 13 access to justice
Decizia nr. 391/2019
Psychology practice wins damages after unlawful certification withdrawal; ministry's appeal perempted on unpaid stamp duty.
Decizia nr. 5323/2020
Disciplinary sanction for performing statutory public duties without a private service contract or specialized structure authorization.
Decizia nr. 1524/2019
Police officer-psychologist allowed to keep private psychology practice; ANI incompatibility finding annulled

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory, applying the procedural rule for the binding nature of the judgment.

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

ROMÂNIA

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept

Minuta deciziei nr. 6 Dosar nr. 3030/1/2019

Şedinţa din 17 februarie 2020

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Dolj – Secţia penală, în dosarul nr. 4686/63/2019, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la următoarea chestiune de drept:

„În interpretarea art. 20 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 253/2013 privind executarea pedepselor, a măsurilor educative şi a altor măsuri neprivative de libertate dispuse de organele judiciare în cursul procesului penal, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, Cabinetul Individual de Psihologie înregistrat în temeiul dispozițiilor art. 13-15 din Legea nr. 213/2004 privind exercitarea profesiei de psiholog cu drept de liberă practică, înființarea, organizarea şi funcționarea Colegiului Psihologilor din România, cu modificările ulterioare, constituie asociație, fundație sau societate comercială dintre cele prevăzute de art. 21 din Legea nr. 253/2013 ?”

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunţată în şedinţa publică din 17 februarie 2020.