Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_170762 AI generated

Referral on interruption of prescriptive period by new summons lacking triple identity and admissibility of re-trying definitively adjudicated issues

Case Number ICCJ_170762
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 referral for the resolution of a legal issue by the Court of Appeal of Galați, leaving the underlying civil dispute unaffected by this procedural ruling. The dispute involved a preliminary question regarding the interpretation of Article 2539(2) of the Civil Code, specifically whether the interruption of the statute of limitations occurs even if a new summons lacks the triple identity of parties, object, and cause compared to the initial one, and whether a definitively adjudicated issue can be reanalyzed in subsequent proceedings. The decisive legal basis for the inadmissibility finding is Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which governs the mandatory referral to the High Court of Cassation and Justice for the resolution of specific legal questions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Referral on interruption of prescriptive period by new summons lacking triple identity and admissibility of re-trying definitively adjudicated issues: The dispute involved a preliminary question regarding the interpretation of Article 2539(2) of the Civil Code, specifically whether the interruption of the statute of limitations occurs even if a new summons lacks the triple identity of parties, object, and cause compared to the initial one, and whether a definitively adjudicated issue can be reanalyzed in subsequent proceedings. The decisive legal basis for the inadmissibility finding is Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which governs the mandatory referral to the High Court of Cassation and Justice for the resolution of specific legal questions.

Keywords

AI generated
interruption of limitation period preliminary ruling procedure summons article of civil procedure procedural issues statutory basis

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory obligation arising from the dismissal of the referral.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 1/2021
Statutory interpretation of triple identity requirement for interruption of prescription in new claim following prior dismissal
ICCJ_147647
Preliminary ruling referral on lapse during mandatory stay inadmissible; question left unresolved.
ICCJ_230688
Inadmissibility of referrals for the resolution of legal questions due to procedural defects
Decizia nr. 45/2021
Preliminary ruling referral deemed inadmissible for lacking formal statutory requirements.
ICCJ_123246
Admissibility of referral for resolution of legal questions (chestiuni de drept)

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory obligation arising from the dismissal of the referral.

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. 1 Dosar nr. 2648/1/2020

Şedinţa din 18 ianuarie 2021

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Galaţi – Secţia a II-a civilă în dosarul nr. 595/196/2017, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

„Art. 2539 alin. (2) din Codul civil poate fi interpretat în sensul că:

1. efectul de întrerupere a prescripției extinctive se produce chiar dacă în noua cerere de chemare în judecată sau de arbitrare nu se întâlnește tripla identitate (de părţi, obiect şi cauză) în raport cu prima cerere?

2. dacă răspunsul la prima întrebare este negativ, atunci în judecarea noii cereri de chemare în judecată sau de arbitrare poate fi reanalizată o chestiune litigioasă soluționată definitiv în primul proces?”

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 18 ianuarie 2021.