Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_219253 AI generated

Uniform interpretation of the applicable notarial fee grid for restitution of communist-era properties when both the right and point allocation are determined in a single judgment

Case Number ICCJ_219253
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, exercising its power to ensure uniform interpretation of the law, granted the appeal in the interest of law filed by the appellate court, mandating that the applicable notary fee schedule for restitution cases is the one valid in the year preceding the judicial decision; this ruling establishes binding precedent under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code. The dispute concerned the correct application of Law no. 165/2013 regarding the return of abnormally seized properties, specifically which notary fee grid applies when a court simultaneously determines the existence of the right to restitution measures and the number of points awarded to the entitled person. The decisive legal basis is the unitary interpretation of Article 21(6) in conjunction with Article 35(1) and (3) of Law no. 165/2013, as clarified by the Court's decision that the notary fees are calculated based on the schedule in force during the year prior to the pronouncement of the judgment.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Uniform interpretation of the applicable notarial fee grid for restitution of communist-era properties when both the right and point allocation are determined in a single judgment: The dispute concerned the correct application of Law no. 165/2013 regarding the return of abnormally seized properties, specifically which notary fee grid applies when a court simultaneously determines the existence of the right to restitution measures and the number of points awarded to the entitled person. The decisive legal basis is the unitary interpretation of Article 21(6) in conjunction with Article 35(1) and (3) of Law no. 165/2013, as clarified by the Court's decision that the notary fees are calculated based on the schedule in force during the year prior to the pronouncement of the judgment.

Keywords

AI generated
restitution of property interpretation of a judgment Civil Procedure Code notary uniform interpretation legal fees

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the decision regarding the uniform interpretation of the law.
AI generated
ICCJ_232867
Scope of "judicial decision" for notarial fee grid in post-communist property restitution cases
ICCJ_192468
Valuation grid for notary public fees in judicial challenges to communist-era property compensation decisions
ICCJ_141014
Compensation valuation for unrestituted expropriated property: mandatory application of notary fee grids over market value
Decizia nr. 48/2023
Compensation for abusable communist-era property seizures: valuation by notarial grid year preceding judicial judgment vs. current market value
Decizia nr. 9/2022
Applicable notarial grid year for valuing expropriated real estate compensation: prior to administrative decision issuance or judicial finalization

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the decision regarding the uniform interpretation 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. 19 Dosar nr. 1598/1/2024

Şedinţa din 21 octombrie 2024

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite recursul în interesul legii formulat de Colegiul de conducere al Curții de Apel Pitești și, în consecință, stabilește că:

În interpretarea şi aplicarea unitară a dispoziţiilor art. 21 alin. (6) raportat la art. 35 alin. (1) şi (3) din Legea nr. 165/2013 privind măsurile pentru finalizarea procesului de restituire, în natură sau prin echivalent, a imobilelor preluate în mod abuziv în perioada regimului comunist în România, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, grila notarială incidentă, în ipoteza în care instanţa stabileşte atât existenţa dreptului la măsuri reparatorii, cât şi numărul de puncte care se acordă persoanei îndreptăţite, este cea valabilă în anul anterior pronunțării hotărârii judecătorești.

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 21 octombrie 2024.