Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_220628 AI generated

Jurisdiction of supervising court over pending appeals in insolvency proceedings: Insolvency Code does not derogate from Civil Procedure Code

Case Number ICCJ_220628
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, in a Plenary Decision on Recusal in the Interest of the Law, admitted the appeal filed by the Court’s Governing Council and established a binding interpretive rule. The dispute concerned a conflict of law between the Insolvency Code and the Civil Procedure Code regarding the jurisdiction of the supervising court when insolvency proceedings are initiated against a defendant after the conclusion of oral arguments or during pending appeals. The Court held that the Insolvency Code does not derogate from common procedural law; consequently, the supervising court retains exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate all pending appeals in the reformative degree, whether filed by the debtor or the creditor. This decision is based on the interpretation of Article 75(1) and Article 75(2)(a) of Law No. 85/2014 (Insolvency Code) in conjunction with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, and it is mandatory under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Jurisdiction of supervising court over pending appeals in insolvency proceedings: Insolvency Code does not derogate from Civil Procedure Code: The dispute concerned a conflict of law between the Insolvency Code and the Civil Procedure Code regarding the jurisdiction of the supervising court when insolvency proceedings are initiated against a defendant after the conclusion of oral arguments or during pending appeals. The Court held that the Insolvency Code does not derogate from common procedural law; consequently, the supervising court retains exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate all pending appeals in the reformative degree, whether filed by the debtor or the creditor. This decision is based on the interpretation of Article 75(1) and Article 75(2)(a) of Law No. 85/2014 (Insolvency Code) in conjunction with the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, and it is mandatory under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Keywords

AI generated
insolvency Civil Procedure Code conflict of jurisdiction pending proceedings rules of procedure supervisory jurisdiction

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural basis cited in the dispositive to confirm the mandatory nature of the decision issued in the interest of the law.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 2521/2020
Recusal in insolvency appeals and judge antepronuntiatio through associated cases
Decizia nr. 416/2018
Jurisdiction of the High Court for appeals against Tribunal decisions under the Civil Procedure Code hierarchy
Decizia nr. 3140/2018
Jurisdiction for appellate review of tribunal decisions in first-instance cases initiated at the judicial level under Civil Procedure Code
ICCJ_86239
Jurisdiction for enforcing liability of insolvency management bodies: tax authorities versus judicial bailiff under cross-reference of insolvency and fiscal procedure codes
Decizia nr. 2435/2018
Exclusion of Supreme Court jurisdiction over tribunal appeals in low-value civil matters under the New Code of Civil Procedure

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 75 alin. (1) coroborate cu cele stipulate de art. 75 alin. (2) lit. a) teza întâi din Legea nr. 85/2014

Substantive ground for the ruling, establishing that the Insolvency Code does not derogate from common procedural rules regarding the jurisdiction of the supervising court.

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

Procedural basis cited in the dispositive to confirm the mandatory nature of the decision issued 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. 22 Dosar nr. 1533/1/2024

Şedinţa din 18 noiembrie 2024

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite recursul în interesul legii formulat de Colegiul de conducere al Înaltei Curţi de Casaţie si Justiţie şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În interpretarea şi aplicarea art. 75 alin. (1) coroborate cu cele stipulate de art. 75 alin. (2) lit. a) teza întâi din Legea nr. 85/2014, dispoziţiile Codului insolvenţei nu derogă de la prevederile de drept comun ale Codului de procedură civilă, care obligă instanţa de control judiciar, învestită cu căi de atac în reformare promovate atât de debitor cât şi de creditor, în condiţiile deschiderii procedurii insolvenţei faţă de debitorul pârât ulterior închiderii dezbaterilor sau în cursul soluţionării căilor de atac, să judece toate căile de atac.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 18 noiembrie 2024.