Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_217297 AI generated

Scope of continuing construction after stoppage order: offense under Law 50/1991 excludes orders issued by criminal prosecution authorities

Case Number ICCJ_217297
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, acting as the complete panel for resolving questions of law in criminal matters, admitted the preliminary reference posed by the Court of Appeal Brașov and decisively ruled that the offense defined in Article 24(b) of Law No. 50/1991 regarding the continuation of construction works after a mandatory stoppage does not extend to cases where the stoppage is ordered by criminal prosecution authorities rather than competent control bodies. This interpretation establishes that the statutory provision targets only violations of administrative suspension orders, thereby excluding conduct solely contrary to penal investigation directives from the specific incrimination under the cited housing law. The decision, which resolves the legal uncertainty raised by the lower court, is mandatory from its publication in the Official Monitor of Romania pursuant to Article 477(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 24 lit. b) din Legea nr. 50/1991, art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Scope of continuing construction after stoppage order: offense under Law 50/1991 excludes orders issued by criminal prosecution authorities: 50/1991 regarding the continuation of construction works after a mandatory stoppage does not extend to cases where the stoppage is ordered by criminal prosecution authorities rather than competent control bodies. This interpretation establishes that the statutory provision targets only violations of administrative suspension orders, thereby excluding conduct solely contrary to penal investigation directives from the specific incrimination under the cited housing law. The decision, which resolves the legal uncertainty raised by the lower court, is mandatory from its publication in the Official Monitor of Romania pursuant to Article 477(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Keywords

AI generated
criminal prosecution suspension of investigation exclusion order exclusion of liability fine for construction violation housing law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 24 lit. b) din Legea nr. 50/1991
The substantive provision at the core of the legal question, whose scope the court defined in the dispositive to exclude cases where work stoppage is ordered by criminal prosecution authorities.
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală
Procedural provision cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature and effective date of the decision upon publication in the Official Monitor.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 46/2024
Continuing construction after prosecutor's stop order is not a crime under Law 50/1991; legislative gap cannot be filled by analogy.
Decizia nr. 116/RC/2022
Scope of cassation review: verification of objective typicity for unauthorized construction continuation and exclusion of administrative stop order legality from criminal appellate jurisdiction
ICCJ_162469
Completed unauthorized construction: limitation runs from actual completion, not from contravention finding
ICCJ_158624
Unauthorized-construction penalty limitation referral dismissed as inadmissible
Decizia nr. 1619/2008
Criminal liability for unauthorized construction in protected zones: subsequent permit does not extinguish offense but reduces social danger for administrative sanction.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 24 lit. b) din Legea nr. 50/1991

The substantive provision at the core of the legal question, whose scope the court defined in the dispositive to exclude cases where work stoppage is ordered by criminal prosecution authorities.

art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală

Procedural provision cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature and effective date of the decision upon publication in the Official Monitor.

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

R O M Â N I A

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

COMPLETUL PENTRU DEZLEGAREA UNOR CHESTIUNI DE DREPT

ÎN MATERIE PENALĂ

Minuta deciziei nr. 46 Dosar nr.1318/1/2024

Ședința din data de 16 septembrie 2024

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Braşov - Secţia penală în dosarul nr. 7387/197/2021 prin care se solicită pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarelor chestiuni de drept:

„Dacă infracţiunea prevăzută în art. 24 lit. b) din Legea nr. 50/1991, constând în continuarea executării lucrărilor, după dispunerea opririi acestora de către organele de control competente potrivit legii, vizează deopotrivă aceeaşi conduită interzisă, incriminată ca infracţiune şi în cazul în care lucrările nu se opresc, dar sistarea lor este dispusă de către organele de urmărire penală?” şi stabileşte că:

Infracţiunea prevăzută în art. 24 lit. b) din Legea nr. 50/1991, constând în continuarea executării lucrărilor după dispunerea opririi acestora de către organele de control competente potrivit legii, nu vizează şi situaţia în care lucrările continuă după dispunerea opririi acestora de către organele de urmărire penală.

Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi, 16 septembrie 2024.