Legislator Case Law & Legislation
ICCJ_187616 AI generated

Admissibility of appeal in the interest of the law challenging if non-publication of a government decree on military allowances prevented accrual of limitation period under Art. 2523 Civil Code

Case Number ICCJ_187616
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the appeal in the interest of the law filed by the leadership board of the Cluj-Napoca Court of Appeal, leaving the lower court's judgment in force. The dispute concerned whether a beneficiary's lack of knowledge regarding specific financial rights defined in a non-published government decree on military mission allowances—which was referenced in public legislation but not itself published in the Official Monitor or communicated to affected parties—prevented the running of the limitation period under Article 2523 of the Civil Code. The court resolved the procedural matter by finding the appeal in the interest of the law inadmissible, in accordance with Article 517(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, thereby refusing to provide a binding interpretation on the interaction between the unpublished normative act and the civil limitation rules.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Admissibility of appeal in the interest of the law challenging if non-publication of a government decree on military allowances prevented accrual of limitation period under Art. 2523 Civil Code: The dispute concerned whether a beneficiary's lack of knowledge regarding specific financial rights defined in a non-published government decree on military mission allowances—which was referenced in public legislation but not itself published in the Official Monitor or communicated to affected parties—prevented the running of the limitation period under Article 2523 of the Civil Code. The court resolved the procedural matter by finding the appeal in the interest of the law inadmissible, in accordance with Article 517(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure, thereby refusing to provide a binding interpretation on the interaction between the unpublished normative act and the civil limitation rules.

Keywords

AI generated
limitation periods procedural rights matter in dispute accrual of interest article of civil procedure interpretation of a judgment

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the court's decision on the appeal in the interest of the law.
AI generated

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the court's decision on the appeal in the interest of 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 soluționarea recursului în interesul legii

Minuta deciziei nr. 10 Dosar nr. 159/1/2022

Şedinţa din 21 martie 2022

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibil, recursul în interesul legii formulat de Colegiul de conducere al Curţii de Apel Brașov privind dezlegarea următoarei probleme de drept:

„În interpretarea şi aplicarea dispoziţiilor art. 2523 din Codul civil, trebuia beneficiarul să cunoască drepturile financiare cuvenite, cu consecinţa curgerii termenului de prescripţie a dreptului material la acţiune împotriva sa, în condiţiile în care acesta nu a efectuat demersuri în vederea aflării conţinutului Hotărârii Guvernului nr. 1.086/2004 pentru stabilirea sporurilor specifice şi a drepturilor de diurnă, cazare şi hrană cuvenite personalului participant la misiuni în afara teritoriului statului român, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, act normativ ce are caracter militar, nepublicat în Monitorul Oficial al României şi necomunicat pe nicio altă cale beneficiarilor drepturilor, dar la a cărui existenţă s-a făcut trimitere în anumite acte legislative publicate în Monitorul Oficial, fără ca în cuprinsul acestor acte legislative să se fi prevăzut conţinutul hotărârii de guvern nepublicate”.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 21 martie 2022.