Whether statutory workplace surcharges under Law No. 153/2017 are subject to phased implementation under Article 38
Romania (RO)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the request for a preliminary ruling (sesizare) filed by the Cluj Court of Appeal, thereby rejecting the referring court's attempt to obtain a binding interpretation on a specific legal issue. The dispute concerned a contentious administrative and fiscal matter regarding whether a workplace surcharge for working conditions, stipulated in Annex VIII, Chapter I, lit. B of Law No. 153/2017, is subject to the phased implementation mechanism provided by Article 38 of the same law. The decisive legal basis for the dismissal was the inadmissibility of the procedure for resolving issues of law, with the decision declared mandatory under Article 52(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Whether statutory workplace surcharges under Law No. 153/2017 are subject to phased implementation under Article 38: The dispute concerned a contentious administrative and fiscal matter regarding whether a workplace surcharge for working conditions, stipulated in Annex VIII, Chapter I, lit. B of Law No. 153/2017, is subject to the phased implementation mechanism provided by Article 38 of the same law. The decisive legal basis for the dismissal was the inadmissibility of the procedure for resolving issues of law, with the decision declared mandatory under Article 52(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedCited in the dispositive to establish that the court's decision dismissing the request for a preliminary ruling is mandatory.
Full text
ROMÂNIA
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept
Minuta deciziei nr. 46 Dosar nr. 793/1/2020
Şedinţa din 22 iunie 2020
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE:
Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Cluj - Secţia a III-a contencios administrativ şi fiscal, în dosarul nr. 6948/63/2018, privind pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:
„Dacă sporul pentru condiţiile de muncă prevăzut de art. 1 din Anexa VIII Cap. I lit. B din Legea nr. 153/2017 este supus sau nu aplicării etapizate prevăzute de art. 38 din aceeaşi lege”.
Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.
Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 22 iunie 2020.