Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_205594 AI generated

Appeal in the interest of the law upheld: 2010 pension law does not bar revision under 2005 ordinance

Case Number ICCJ_205594
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 admitted the appeal in the interest of the law filed by the Prosecutor General and ruled that Art. 169¹ of Law No. 263/2010 on the unified public pension system does not remove or prevent the revision of pension rights with the application of Art. 2(1) and Art. 4(1) of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 4/2005 on the recalculation of public system pensions originating from the former state social insurance system, corroborated with Art. 2(1) and (3) of the annex to Government Decision No. 1,550/2004, in line with the principles of Law No. 19/2000, as interpreted by Decision No. 11 of 25 May 2015 of the High Court's panel deciding appeals in the interest of the law. The decision is binding pursuant to Art. 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code. The dispute concerned divergent case law on whether the special recalculation rules established by the 2010 pension law could block the ongoing recalculation of old-system pensions under the 2005 emergency ordinance, and the court resolved it in favor of allowing such revision, thereby prevailing for the pensioners seeking recalculation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 1691 din Legea nr. 263/2010, art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Appeal in the interest of the law upheld: 2010 pension law does not bar revision under 2005 ordinance: 169¹ of Law No. 263/2010 on the unified public pension system does not remove or prevent the revision of pension rights with the application of Art. 2(1) and Art. 4(1) of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 4/2005 on the recalculation of public system pensions originating from the former state social insurance system, corroborated with Art. 2(1) and (3) of the annex to Government Decision No. 1,550/2004, in line with the principles of Law No. 19/2000, as interpreted by Decision No. 11 of 25 May 2015 of the High Court's panel deciding appeals in the interest of the law. The decision is binding pursuant to Art. 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code. The dispute concerned divergent case law on whether the special recalculation rules established by the 2010 pension law could block the ongoing recalculation of old-system pensions under the 2005 emergency ordinance, and the court resolved it in favor of allowing such revision, thereby prevailing for the pensioners seeking recalculation.

Keywords

AI generated
pension revision emergency government ordinance social insurance dispute interpretation of the law established right application for revision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 1691 din Legea nr. 263/2010
Provision whose interpretation was the subject of the appeal in the interest of the law, held not to preclude pension rights review.
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Basis for the binding effect of the decision in the appeal in the interest of the law.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 5608/2011
Challenge to Government Ordinance on pension recalculation; dismissal of appeal for lack of interest due to subsequent abrogation of the normative act
Decizia nr. 5060/2011
Pension Recalculation Under Law No. 119/2010 Upheld; Appeals Against Government Decision No. 737/2010 Rejected
Decizia nr. 2705/2012
Pension recalculation methodology upholding; appeals allowed and sentence reformed to dismiss challenge to government decision
Decizia nr. 4634/2011
Recalculation of service pensions under Government Order 737/2010 upheld; appeals dismissed
Decizia nr. 4250/2013
Pension recalculation challenge rejected; revision inadmissible due to res judicata of appellate ruling.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 1691 din Legea nr. 263/2010

Provision whose interpretation was the subject of the appeal in the interest of the law, held not to preclude pension rights review.

art. 2 alin. (1) și art. 4 alin. (1) din Ordonanța de urgență a Guvernului nr. 4/2005

Provisions applied in the interpretation established by the decision for the review of pension rights.

art. 2 alin. (1) și (3) din anexa la Hotărârea Guvernului nr. 1.550/2004

Provisions corroborated with the above, applied in the interpretation established by the decision for pension recalculations.

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

Basis for the binding effect of the decision in 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. 17 Dosar nr. 1958/1/2023

Şedinţa din 23 octombrie 2023

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite recursul în interesul legii declarat de procurorul general al Parchetului de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

Prevederile art. 1691 din Legea nr. 263/2010 privind sistemul unitar de pensii publice, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, nu înlătură şi nu împiedică revizuirea drepturilor de pensie cu aplicarea dispoziţiilor art. 2 alin. (1) şi art. 4 alin. (1) din Ordonanţa de urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 4/2005 privind recalcularea pensiilor din sistemul public, provenite din fostul sistem al asigurărilor sociale de stat, aprobată cu completări prin Legea nr. 78/2005, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, coroborate cu dispoziţiile art. 2 alin. (1) şi (3) din anexa la Hotărârea Guvernului nr. 1.550/2004 privind efectuarea operaţiunilor de evaluare în vederea recalculării pensiilor din sistemul public, stabilite în fostul sistem al asigurărilor sociale de stat potrivit legislaţiei anterioare datei de 1 aprilie 2001, în conformitate cu principiile Legii nr. 19/2000, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, în interpretarea dată acestor texte prin Decizia nr. 11 din 25 mai 2015, pronunţată de Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie - Completul competent să judece recursul în interesul legii, publicată în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, nr. 522 din 14 iulie 2015.

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 23 octombrie 2023.