Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_172256 AI generated

Admissibility of compensation for non-performance in kind barred by penalty ruling or statute of limitations under administrative litigation law.

Case Number ICCJ_172256
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) resolved a preliminary question of law in favor of the strict statutory interpretation, establishing that a creditor can no longer file a request for compensation for non-performance in kind after the execution court has ruled on a penalty claim or after the statute of limitations for enforced execution has expired. The dispute concerned the procedural admissibility of claims for damages regarding the personal performance of an obligation under administrative and fiscal litigation, specifically challenging whether such compensation could be sought indefinitely. The decisive legal basis is Article 24(4) of the Administrative Litigation Law No. 554/2004, as amended by Law No. 138/2014, interpreted to mean that the specific provision for establishing compensation is time-barred or preempted by the execution court's decision on penalties or the passage of the limitation period.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Admissibility of compensation for non-performance in kind barred by penalty ruling or statute of limitations under administrative litigation law: The dispute concerned the procedural admissibility of claims for damages regarding the personal performance of an obligation under administrative and fiscal litigation, specifically challenging whether such compensation could be sought indefinitely. The decisive legal basis is Article 24(4) of the Administrative Litigation Law No. 554/2004, as amended by Law No. 138/2014, interpreted to mean that the specific provision for establishing compensation is time-barred or preempted by the execution court's decision on penalties or the passage of the limitation period.

Keywords

AI generated
barring of penalties by limitation procedural limitations non-administrative dispute fiscal law personal performance basis of obligation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
The procedural rule cited to establish the binding nature of the court's interpretation.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 47/2024
Limitations on challenging fixed late-penalty interest for non-performance of personal obligations: scope of execution objection and admissibility of preliminary ruling
Decizia nr. 21/2021
Admissibility of separate claim for damages in administrative enforcement proceedings under Law No. 554/2004
Decizia nr. 2149/2012
Statutory limitation for compensation claims following annulment of administrative acts under administrative jurisdiction law
Decizia nr. 104/2025
Statute of limitations interruption for damages claim arising from specific performance judgment under civil liability for non-performance of contractual obligations
Decizia nr. 320/2019
Administrative enforcement: Appeal for compensation of late performance dismissed as unfounded

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 24 alin. (4) din Legea contenciosului administrativ nr. 554/2004

The provision interpreted to determine the admissibility of the creditor's request for compensation for non-performance in kind.

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

The procedural rule cited to establish the binding nature of the court's interpretation.

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. 21 Dosar nr. 63/1/2021

Şedinţa de la 5 aprilie 2021

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Iași - Secţia contencios administrativ şi fiscal, în Dosarul nr. 4088/99/2019, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În interpretarea şi aplicarea dispozițiilor art. 24 alin. (4) din Legea contenciosului administrativ nr. 554/2004, astfel cum a fost modificat prin Legea nr. 138/2014, după pronunţarea de către instanţa de executare asupra cererii creditorului de fixare a sumei datorate cu titlu de penalități sau, în lipsa unei astfel de cereri, după împlinirea termenului de prescripție a executării silite, nu mai este admisibilă formularea de către creditor, în temeiul acestei norme speciale, a cererii de stabilire a despăgubirilor pentru neexecutarea în natură a obligației de a face care implică faptul personal al debitorului.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţa publică din 5 aprilie 2021.