Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_202993 AI generated

Scope of "injured person" in administrative litigation: whether third-party compensation claimants qualify under Art. 19 of Law No. 554/2004

Case Number ICCJ_202993
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 dismissed as inadmissible the referral for a preliminary ruling on a question of law submitted by the Targu Mures Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned the interpretation of "injured person" (*persoana vatamata*) under Article 19 of Law No. 554/2004 on administrative litigation, specifically whether this term strictly refers to the party who initially sought the annulment of a normative administrative act without concurrently claiming compensation, or if it also encompasses a third party who subsequently seeks compensation based on an administrative normative act annulled by someone else. The court found the referral inadmissible, thereby upholding the procedural requirements set forth in Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which governs the conditions under which lower courts may refer questions of law to the High Court for uniform interpretation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 19 din Legea nr. 554/2004, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Scope of "injured person" in administrative litigation: whether third-party compensation claimants qualify under Art. 19 of Law No. 554/2004: The dispute concerned the interpretation of "injured person" (*persoana vatamata*) under Article 19 of Law No. 554/2004 on administrative litigation, specifically whether this term strictly refers to the party who initially sought the annulment of a normative administrative act without concurrently claiming compensation, or if it also encompasses a third party who subsequently seeks compensation based on an administrative normative act annulled by someone else. The court found the referral inadmissible, thereby upholding the procedural requirements set forth in Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which governs the conditions under which lower courts may refer questions of law to the High Court for uniform interpretation.

Keywords

AI generated
third-party claim preliminary ruling procedure article of civil procedure interpretation of the law procedural capacity preliminary decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 19 din Legea nr. 554/2004
În interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 19 din Legea contenciosului administrativ nr.
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish that the binding nature of the decision is mandatory.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 44/2023
Preliminary ruling referral on "injured person" standing under Art. 19 Law No. 554/2004 held inadmissible for lack of genuine interpretive difficulty
Decizia nr. 5390/2023
Administrative compensation claim inadmissible without prior judicial annulment of the specific administrative decision causing the alleged injury.
Decizia nr. 4747/2023
Administrative liability: Prescriptive limitation for separate damages claims under Article 19 of Law No. 554/2004 following annulment of an illegal administrative act
Decizia nr. 3269/2016
Inadmissibility of civil compensation claim due to lack of standing as injured party under administrative litigation law
Decizia nr. 995/2022
Territorial competence in administrative litigation: plaintiff public institution acting as injured party subject to court of its domicile

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited in the dispositive to establish that the binding nature of the decision is mandatory.

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. 44 Dosar nr. 933/1/2023

Şedinţa de la 12 iunie 2023

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Târgu Mureş - Secţia a II-a civilă, de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, prin Încheierea din 20 martie 2023 pronunţată în Dosarul nr. 244/102/2021*, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

În interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 19 din Legea contenciosului administrativ nr. 554/2004, sintagma „persoana vătămată” are în vedere strict persoana care a solicitat anterior, în condiţiile art. 18 alin. (3) raportat la art. 8 din Legea contenciosului administrativ nr. 554/2004, anularea unui act administrativ normativ fără a solicita totodată şi acordarea despăgubirilor pentru daune materiale şi morale sau în noţiunea de „persoana vătămată” se include, în sensul art. 19 din Legea nr. 554/2004, şi o persoană care solicită despăgubiri în raport de vătămarea cauzată de un act administrativ normativ anulat la cererea unui terţ?

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 12 iunie 2023.