Admissibility of unifying interpretation referral on police officer's entitlement to managerial salary differential for concurrent appointee role

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible a request for a unifying interpretation of a legal question posed by the Prahova County Court, meaning no binding legal interpretation was established and the lower court's procedural mechanism was rejected. The underlying dispute concerned whether a public servant with a special status (specifically a police officer) is entitled to salary differential payments for the managerial position of inspector head, given that they were simultaneously assigned that duty via their job description and appointed to the position of adjunct through a separate administrative act. The admissibility determination was grounded in the procedural requirements for submitting cases to the Complete Bench for the resolution of legal issues under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which deems the submission inadmissible if it fails to meet the statutory conditions for unifying contradictory jurisprudence.