Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_169587 AI generated

Material jurisdiction for appeals against public health quarantine orders under Law 136/2020

Case Number ICCJ_169587
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 appeal in the interest of the law filed by the Board of Directors of the Bucharest Court of Appeal, leaving the lower court's procedural status quo in force. The case concerned a legal dispute over the material procedural competence of the court to hear an appeal against a first-instance judgment seeking the annulment of quarantine measures ordered by the public health directorate, initiated under the legislative framework for epidemiological and biological risk situations. The Court determined the admissibility of the recourse based on the strict procedural requirements of Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the admissibility of appeals in the interest of the law to the Supreme Court.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 17 din Legea nr. 136/2020, art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Material jurisdiction for appeals against public health quarantine orders under Law 136/2020: The case concerned a legal dispute over the material procedural competence of the court to hear an appeal against a first-instance judgment seeking the annulment of quarantine measures ordered by the public health directorate, initiated under the legislative framework for epidemiological and biological risk situations. The Court determined the admissibility of the recourse based on the strict procedural requirements of Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the admissibility of appeals in the interest of the law to the Supreme Court.

Keywords

AI generated
admissibility of cassation appeal right of appeal jurisdiction of the court inadmissibility of public law appeal Romanian civil procedure appeal in cassation
AI generated
ICCJ_170764
Competence for appealing public health quarantine orders: civil versus administrative sections after legislative amendment mooted the review
ICCJ_225217
Quarantine civil liability appeal quashed and remanded due to improper retroactive application of constitutional unconstitutionality decision and misapplication of ECHR Article 3 s
ICCJ_183319
Appeal against dismissal of challenge to zonal quarantine order dismissed; lower court ruling upheld as legally valid
ICCJ_180471
Challenge to pandemic zonal quarantine order: procedural publication requirements, statutory delegation of constitutional restrictions, and risk assessment validity under Law No. 1
ICCJ_200225
Inadmissibility of appeal against jurisdiction declination in annulment of government health emergency measures

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited in the dispositive to establish the obligatory nature of the decision regarding the dismissal of the appeal in the interest of the law.

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

SECŢIILE UNITE

Completul pentru soluționarea recursului în interesul legii

Minuta deciziei nr. 28 Dosar nr. 2458/1/2020

Şedinţa de la 9 noiembrie 2020

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E :

Respinge, ca inadmisibil, recursul în interesul legii formulat de Colegiul de conducere al Curţii de Apel Bucureşti cu privire la următoarea problemă de drept:

Interpretarea şi aplicarea prevederilor art. 17 din Legea nr. 136/2020 privind instituirea unor măsuri în domeniul sănătăţii publice în situaţii de risc epidemiologic şi biologic, în sensul de a se stabili instanţa competentă din punct de vedere material procesual de a soluţiona apelul declarat împotriva sentinţei pronunţate de judecătorie în litigiile având ca obiect anularea deciziilor de instituire a carantinei emise de direcţia de sănătate publică.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 9 noiembrie 2020.