Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_205368 AI generated

Panel change decisions not appealable via procedural ground; separate administrative challenge required.

Case Number ICCJ_205368
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice (Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie), sitting as a panel for preliminary rulings, admitted the referral from the Piteşti Court of Appeal and issued a binding preliminary ruling (decision no. 52 of 18 September 2023). It held that, under Article 488(1)(2) of the Romanian Code of Civil Procedure, read with Articles 19 and 219, a challenger cannot use the ground of appeal (recurs) alleging violation of procedural rules to attack the legality of a decision by a court's management board that changes the composition of the panel hearing an appeal; instead, such a decision must be challenged separately under the Administrative Litigation Law no. 554/2004. The ruling is mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 din Codul de procedură civilă, Art. 19 și 219 din Codul de procedură civilă, Art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Panel change decisions not appealable via procedural ground; separate administrative challenge required: 52 of 18 September 2023). It held that, under Article 488(1)(2) of the Romanian Code of Civil Procedure, read with Articles 19 and 219, a challenger cannot use the ground of appeal (recurs) alleging violation of procedural rules to attack the legality of a decision by a court's management board that changes the composition of the panel hearing an appeal; instead, such a decision must be challenged separately under the Administrative Litigation Law no. 554/2004. The ruling is mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Keywords

AI generated
preliminary ruling procedure challenge of administrative decisions grounds for cassation preliminary decision grounds of challenge procedural rules

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 din Codul de procedură civilă
Main ground for the ruling: the court interpreted this provision, establishing that criticisms regarding the legality of the measure to change the composition of the panel cannot be analyzed under this ground of appeal.
Art. 19 și 219 din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural provisions referred to in the dispositive, in relation to which the interpretation of Article 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 was made.
Art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural rule applied in the dispositive, making the preliminary ruling mandatory.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 79/2025
Appeal for revision of 2019 administrative ruling annulled for failure to state cassation grounds.
Decizia nr. 264/2020
Appeal admissibility against final change-of-venue order and subsequent clarification decision
Decizia nr. 159/2020
Appeal against final appellate ruling held inadmissible; prior decision stands.
Decizia nr. 14/2018
Composition of the judicial panel for appeals against execution challenges: admissibility of preliminary ruling on procedural composition
Decizia nr. 2/2025
Finality of decisions on the preliminary admissibility of cassation appeals in criminal proceedings

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 din Codul de procedură civilă

Main ground for the ruling: the court interpreted this provision, establishing that criticisms regarding the legality of the measure to change the composition of the panel cannot be analyzed under this ground of appeal.

Art. 19 și 219 din Codul de procedură civilă

Procedural provisions referred to in the dispositive, in relation to which the interpretation of Article 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 was made.

Art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive, making the preliminary ruling 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. 52 Dosar nr. 1500/1/2023

Ședința din 18 septembrie 2023

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Piteşti - Secţia I civilă, în dosarul nr. 5465/288/2017, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 din Codul de procedură civilă, prin raportare la cele ale art. 19 şi 219 din acelaşi cod, în cadrul motivului de recurs prevăzut de art. 488 alin. (1) pct. 2 din Codul de procedură civilă, nu pot fi analizate criticile privind legalitatea măsurii de schimbare a compunerii completului de judecată în apel dispuse printr-o hotărâre a colegiului de conducere al instanţei, legalitatea acestei hotărâri putând fi analizată în condiţiile Legii contenciosului administrativ nr. 554/2004, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 18 septembrie 2023.