Admissibility of referral on whether debtor’s post-admission notification suspends enforcement under Law 77/2016

The High Court of Cassation and Justice, acting as the Supreme Judicial Court, rejected the referral of a question of law submitted by the Bucharest Tribunal as inadmissible, thereby leaving the lower court's proceedings unaffected by a preliminary binding ruling. The dispute concerned a civil matter under Law No. 77/2016 regarding the sale of property through public auction, specifically challenging whether a second notification of default issued by the debtor after the creditor's challenge to the first notification had been definitively admitted produced the legal effect of suspending the enforcement proceedings. The court's decision rests on the procedural norms governing the admissibility of referrals for the clarification of points of law, including the requirements of Article 5 paragraphs 1 and 3 in conjunction with Articles 6 and 7 of Law No. 77/2016, which dictate that such referrals are mandatory only when a valid and admissible preliminary question exists to be resolved by the supreme court.