Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_172416 AI generated

Classification of post-insolvency interest under variable-rate credit contracts as current claims

Case Number ICCJ_172416
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 request for a preliminary ruling filed by the Bucharest Court of Appeal, thereby leaving the procedural status of the reference unresolved at this instance. The dispute concerned the interpretation of bankruptcy law regarding whether interest accruing after the opening of insolvency proceedings constitutes a "current claim," specifically in cases involving credit contracts with interest rates linked to a periodic reference index that was unknown at the time of the procedure's opening. The decisive legal basis for the dismissal was the inadmissibility of the reference itself, evaluated under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the conditions for submitting questions of law to the Supreme Court's plenary session for uniform interpretation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 123 alin. (9) din Legea nr. 85/2014, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Classification of post-insolvency interest under variable-rate credit contracts as current claims: The dispute concerned the interpretation of bankruptcy law regarding whether interest accruing after the opening of insolvency proceedings constitutes a "current claim," specifically in cases involving credit contracts with interest rates linked to a periodic reference index that was unknown at the time of the procedure's opening. The decisive legal basis for the dismissal was the inadmissibility of the reference itself, evaluated under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, which governs the conditions for submitting questions of law to the Supreme Court's plenary session for uniform interpretation.

Keywords

AI generated
insolvency interest rate contract interpretation current interest statutory default interest reference for a preliminary ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 123 alin. (9) din Legea nr. 85/2014
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited to establish that the decision is mandatory, a procedural requirement applied in the dispositive.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 44/2021
Insolvency Law: Whether post-opening interest under a variable-rate credit contract constitutes a current claim with priority payment status
Decizia nr. 2760/2014
Validity of non-negotiated bank credit clauses for variable interest calculated by internal reference index versus fixed margin
Decizia nr. 879/2023
Retroactive restitution of interest payments under voided abusive variable-rate clauses in consumer credit agreements
Decizia nr. 1635/2023
Default-interest claim on post-judgment debt survives alternative enforcement route; case quashed and remanded on interest, counterclaim upheld.
Decizia nr. 135/2017
Abusive character of variable interest rate clauses and banking fees in consumer credit contracts

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited to establish that the decision is mandatory, a procedural requirement applied in the dispositive.

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. 44 Dosar nr. 834/1/2021

Şedinţa din 7 iunie 2021

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Bucureşti - Secţia a VI-a Civilă, în dosarul nr. 12297/3/2016/a28, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

„Cum se interpretează prevederile art. 5 alin. (1) pct. 21 şi art. 123 alin. (9) din Legea nr. 85/2014 privind procedurile de prevenire a insolvenţei şi de insolvenţă, respectiv dacă constituie creanţă curentă dobânzile care curg după deschiderea procedurii în situaţia contractului de credit (încheiat anterior cererii de deschidere a procedurii, dar menţinut după deschiderea procedurii) cu dobândă stabilită în funcţie de un indice de referinţă periodic şi care nu este cunoscut la data deschiderii procedurii pentru a se putea calcula de către creditor valoarea dobânzii curse ulterior acestui moment”.

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 7 iunie 2021.