Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_178588 AI generated

Preliminary ruling referral on suspension scope under Law No. 77/2016 inadmissible; issue unresolved and no binding interpretation issued.

Case Number ICCJ_178588
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, ruling as a preliminary ruling panel, dismissed as inadmissible a referral from the Suceava Tribunal (Civil Section I) seeking a preliminary ruling on whether the suspension of payments to the creditor and of any judicial or extrajudicial procedures initiated by the creditor under Art. 6 and Art. 8 of Law No. 77/2016 (on the discharge of real estate debts) applies both in the case of the notification under Art. 5(1) and in the case of an action brought by debtors under Art. 8(5) of the same law. Because the referral was inadmissible, no substantive interpretation was given; however, the decision is binding under Art. 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, meaning the issue remains unresolved and no new obligation is created for the referring court. The underlying dispute concerned the scope of statutory suspension protections for debtors under the debt-for-property scheme against creditor enforcement actions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 8 din Legea nr. 77/2016, art. 5 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 77/2016, art. 8 alin. (5) din Legea nr. 77/2016, Art. 521 alin. (3) C. pr. civ; Preliminary ruling referral on suspension scope under Law No. 77/2016 inadmissible; issue unresolved and no binding interpretation issued: 6 and Art. 8 of Law No. 77/2016 (on the discharge of real estate debts) applies both in the case of the notification under Art. 5(1) and in the case of an action brought by debtors under Art. 8(5) of the same law. Because the referral was inadmissible, no substantive interpretation was given; however, the decision is binding under Art. 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, meaning the issue remains unresolved and no new obligation is created for the referring court. The underlying dispute concerned the scope of statutory suspension protections for debtors under the debt-for-property scheme against creditor enforcement actions.

Keywords

AI generated
suspension of payments preliminary decision preliminary ruling procedure judicial law discharge of obligation scope of protection

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 8 din Legea nr. 77/2016
6 şi art. 8 din Legea nr.
art. 5 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 77/2016
Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin.
art. 8 alin. (5) din Legea nr. 77/2016
77/2016, cât şi în cazul acţiunii promovate de către debitori în temeiul dispoziţiilor art. 8 alin. (5) din Legea nr. 77/2016.
Art. 521 alin. (3) C. pr. civ
Cited to state that the decision is binding according to the law.
AI generated
ICCJ_175898
Admissibility of referral on whether debtor’s post-admission notification suspends enforcement under Law 77/2016
ICCJ_190279
Referral for preliminary ruling on "dare în plată" execution conditions dismissed as inadmissible; no interpretative guidance issued.
ICCJ_137596
Inadmissible referral on preliminary question of law leaves legal issue unresolved
Decizia nr. 69/2021
Scope of statutory suspension of creditor enforcement in mortgage credit disputes under Law No. 77/2016 for debtors subject to continued forced execution
ICCJ_147647
Preliminary ruling referral on lapse during mandatory stay inadmissible; question left unresolved.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 521 alin. (3) C. pr. civ.

Cited to state that the decision is binding according to the law.

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. 69 Dosar nr. 1972/1/2021

Şedinţa din 4 octombrie 2021

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Suceava - Secţia I civilă, în dosarul nr. 1313/314/2019*, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

Dacă dispoziţiile art. 6 şi art. 8 din Legea nr. 77/2016 privind darea în plată a unor bunuri imobile în vederea stingerii obligaţiilor asumate prin credite, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, se interpretează sau nu în sensul că suspendarea oricărei plăţi către creditor, precum şi a oricărei proceduri judiciare sau extrajudiciare demarate de către creditor intervine atât în situaţia notificării prevăzute de art. 5 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 77/2016, cât şi în cazul acţiunii promovate de către debitori în temeiul dispoziţiilor art. 8 alin. (5) din Legea nr. 77/2016.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 4 octombrie 2021.