Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 1809/2022 AI generated

Transfer request for case reassignment over judge bias referred to Brașov Court of Appeal.

Case Number Decizia nr. 1809/2022
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice declined its jurisdiction and referred the petitioner’s request for case transfer (strămutare) to the Brașov Court of Appeal, which is the competent court to decide it. The petitioner had sought transfer of a case pending before the Covasna Tribunal, invoking legitimate suspicion about the judges’ impartiality. The Court held that, under Article 142(1) of the Civil Procedure Code, a transfer request based on legitimate suspicion falls within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal in whose territorial circuit the lower court sits, and therefore applied Article 132 to decline its own competence in favor of the Brașov Court of Appeal. No appeal is available against this ruling.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ, art. 132 C. proc. civ; Transfer request for case reassignment over judge bias referred to Brașov Court of Appeal: The petitioner had sought transfer of a case pending before the Covasna Tribunal, invoking legitimate suspicion about the judges’ impartiality. The Court held that, under Article 142(1) of the Civil Procedure Code, a transfer request based on legitimate suspicion falls within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal in whose territorial circuit the lower court sits, and therefore applied Article 132 to decline its own competence in favor of the Brașov Court of Appeal. No appeal is available against this ruling.

Keywords

AI generated
reassignment or transfer transfer of competence declining of jurisdiction article of civil procedure legitimate suspicion of bias appealability of remand decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ
Determines which court is competent to hear the application for transfer due to legitimate suspicion, leading to the decline of jurisdiction.
art. 132 C. proc. civ
Provides the procedural basis for declining jurisdiction and referring the case to the competent court.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 3355/2018
Case transfer request referred to Bucharest Court of Appeal due to jurisdictional mismatch.
Decizia nr. 1997/2016
Transfer request from Brăila Tribunal referred to Galați Court of Appeal under Article 142(1) CPC.
Decizia nr. 2501/2021
Competence to adjudicate transfer of case for legitimate suspicion: referral to Court of Appeal within territorial jurisdiction of first-instance tribunal
Decizia nr. 1123/2017
Transfer request for legitimate suspicion from county court referred to court of appeal on material incompetence.
Decizia nr. 1616/2021
Transfer request denied for Court of Appeal case; tribunal transfer request remitted to appellate court.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Determines which court is competent to hear the application for transfer due to legitimate suspicion, leading to the decline of jurisdiction.

Art. 132 C. proc. civ.

Provides the procedural basis for declining jurisdiction and referring the case to the competent court.

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

Şedinţa publică din data de 6 octombrie 2022

Deliberând, asupra cererii de strămutare constată următoarele:

Prin cererea înregistrată la 16 septembrie 2022 pe rolul Înaltei Curţi de Casaţie şi Justiţie, secţia I civilă, petentul A. a solicitat strămutarea dosarului nr. x/2018 al Tribunalului Covasna, deoarece situaţia de fapt este de natură să creeze îndoieli în privinţa imparţialităţii judecătorilor cauzei.

Potrivit art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ., cererea de strămutare întemeiată pe motive de bănuială legitimă este de competenţa curţii de apel, dacă instanţa de la care se cere strămutarea este o judecătorie sau un tribunal din circumscripţia acesteia.

Se constată că în susţinerea cererii de strămutare a fost invocat motivul de bănuială legitimă vizând imparţialitatea judecătorilor, iar cererea priveşte strămutarea unui dosar înregistrat pe rolul Tribunalului Covasna, instanţă aflată în circumscripţia teritorială a Curţii de Apel Braşov.

Pentru aceste considerente, în aplicarea dispoziţiilor art. 132 C. proc. civ., raportat la prevederile art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ., Înalta Curte constată că instanţa competentă material a soluţiona cererea de strămutare este Curtea de Apel Braşov, în favoarea căreia urmează a dispune declinarea competenţei.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Declină competenţa de soluţionare a cererii de strămutare a dosarului nr. x/2018 al Tribunalului Covasna, secţia civilă, formulată de petentul A., în favoarea Curţii de Apel Braşov.

Fără cale de atac.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 6 octombrie 2022.