Inadmissibility of appeal in interest of law on uniform interpretation of “real and serious cause” for dismissal under Labor Law
Romania (RO)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed the appeal in the interest of law filed by the Public Defender as inadmissible, thereby leaving the lower court’s position unchanged and effectively denying the requested uniform interpretation. The dispute concerned the need for a unified judicial standard on the interpretation of "real and serious cause" under Article 65(2) of Labor Law No. 53/2003, specifically whether an employer reducing identical job positions must apply selection or discrimination criteria to justify the dismissal of specific employees performing identical or similar activities. The decisive legal basis for the ruling was the procedural inadmissibility of the appeal, which was declared obligatory under Article 517(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, resulting in the rejection of the attempt to establish a uniform legal doctrine on labor dismissal standards.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 65 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 53/2003, art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Inadmissibility of appeal in interest of law on uniform interpretation of “real and serious cause” for dismissal under Labor Law: The dispute concerned the need for a unified judicial standard on the interpretation of "real and serious cause" under Article 65(2) of Labor Law No. 53/2003, specifically whether an employer reducing identical job positions must apply selection or discrimination criteria to justify the dismissal of specific employees performing identical or similar activities. The decisive legal basis for the ruling was the procedural inadmissibility of the appeal, which was declared obligatory under Article 517(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, resulting in the rejection of the attempt to establish a uniform legal doctrine on labor dismissal standards.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedCited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory.
Full text
R O M Â N I A
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
Completul pentru soluționarea recursului în interesul legii
Minuta deciziei nr. 30 Dosar nr. 2558/1/2020
Şedinţa din 7 decembrie 2020
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE:
Respinge ca inadmisibil recursul în interesul legii formulat de Avocatul Poporului cu privire la: << interpretarea şi aplicarea unitară a dispoziţiilor art. 65 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 53/2003, republicată, referitor la sintagma „cauză reală şi serioasă” în sensul de a se stabili „dacă un caracter serios al concedierii presupune ca, în situaţia reducerii numărului de posturi identice din cadrul unităţii, angajatorul trebuie să aplice unele criterii de departajare/selecţie, pentru a justifica alegerea salariatului/salariaţilor care urmează să fie concediat/concediaţi dintr-un număr de salariaţi care desfăşoară activităţi identice sau similare”>>.
Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă.
Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 7 decembrie 2020.