Interpretation of civil procedure code on whether curing judicial stamp tax debt constitutes intent to continue proceedings rather than withdrawal

The High Court of Cassation and Justice, sitting as the Full Bench for Resolving Legal Questions, dismissed as inadmissible the request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Court of Appeal of Bacau regarding civil case no. 1289/321/2020. The dispute concerned the interpretation of Article 196 of the Code of Civil Procedure, specifically whether the procedural step of curing the obligation to pay the judicial stamp tax constitutes an unequivocal manifestation of the party's intent to continue judicial proceedings, thereby precluding a finding of nullity for withdrawal of the claim. By rejecting the referral, the Supreme Court left the lower courts' potential divergent interpretations unresolved at this level, meaning no unified legal interpretation was established, and the specific procedural status of the underlying civil case remains subject to the lower courts' application of the law without a binding precedent from this specific decision.