Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_226588 AI generated

Timeliness of written request for paternity leave benefits: pre-leave submission vs. filing within statutory deadline

Case Number ICCJ_226588
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the referral submitted by the Iaşi Court of Appeal for a preliminary ruling on a legal question concerning the timing of the application for paternity leave benefits. The dispute centered on whether an employee must submit a written request for paternity leave benefits prior to taking the leave, or if the request can be filed during or after the leave period, provided the statutory deadline of eight weeks from the child's birth is respected. The court did not rule on the merits of the substantive legal question, rendering the referral procedurally inadmissible under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure; consequently, no new interpretation was established, and the procedural status quo in the underlying case remains unchanged. The admissibility analysis was grounded in the procedural requirements for referrals to the supreme court under Romanian civil procedure law, while the unadjudicated substantive issue involved the interpretation of Article 2 of Law No. 210/1999 on Paternity Leave, Article 2 of the Methodological Norms (HG No. 244/2000 as amended by HG No. 1577/2022), and Article 514 of the Administrative Code (OUG No. 57/2019).

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Timeliness of written request for paternity leave benefits: pre-leave submission vs. filing within statutory deadline: The dispute centered on whether an employee must submit a written request for paternity leave benefits prior to taking the leave, or if the request can be filed during or after the leave period, provided the statutory deadline of eight weeks from the child's birth is respected. The court did not rule on the merits of the substantive legal question, rendering the referral procedurally inadmissible under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure; consequently, no new interpretation was established, and the procedural status quo in the underlying case remains unchanged. The admissibility analysis was grounded in the procedural requirements for referrals to the supreme court under Romanian civil procedure law, while the unadjudicated substantive issue involved the interpretation of Article 2 of Law No. 210/1999 on Paternity Leave, Article 2 of the Methodological Norms (HG No. 244/2000 as amended by HG No. 1577/2022), and Article 514 of the Administrative Code (OUG No. 57/2019).

Keywords

AI generated
paternity leave timeliness of filing referral of a procedural submission statutory deadline article of civil procedure preliminary decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited to establish the binding nature (obligatorie) of the decision dismissing the referral as inadmissible.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 178/2025
Paternity leave wage claim and admissibility of preliminary ruling on timing of statutory leave request
ICCJ_229360
Admissibility of referral to clarify assimilation of pre-2011 parental leave to professional seniority for social benefits
Decizia nr. 41/2021
Paternity challenge referral ruled inadmissible; six-month limitation deemed case-specific ECHR issue for referring court
ICCJ_224985
Admissibility of referral on whether food allowances constitute part of the base for calculating sick leave, study leave, parental leave, and supplementary days off
Decizia nr. 12/2023
Timing of minimum insurance stage for maternity benefits: completion at birth versus during 126-day leave period under O.U.G. 158/2005

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă

Cited to establish the binding nature (obligatorie) of the decision dismissing the referral as inadmissible.

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 dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept

Minuta deciziei nr. 178 Dosar nr. 292/1/2025

Ședința din 19 mai 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Iaşi - Secţia a II-a civilă, de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, în dosarul nr. 2218/99/2024, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la următoarea chestiune de drept:

Dacă în interpretarea art. 2 alin. (1), (11), (2), (4) şi art. 4 alin. (1) din Legea concediului paternal nr. 210/1999, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, cu referire la art. 2 teza I din Normele metodologice de aplicare a Legii concediului paternal nr. 210/1999, aprobate prin Hotărârea Guvernului nr. 244/2000, cu completările ulterioare, astfel cum a fost modificat prin pct. 2 din Hotărârea Guvernului nr. 1577/2022 pentru modificarea Normelor metodologice de aplicare a Legii concediului paternal nr. 210/1999, aprobate prin Hotărârea Guvernului nr. 244/2000, precum şi prin raportare la art. 514 alin. (1) lit. d) şi alin. (2) din Ordonanţa de Urgenţă a Guvernului nr. 57/2019 privind Codul Administrativ, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, solicitantul unei indemnizaţii pentru concediu paternal trebuie să formuleze în scris o astfel de cerere anterior efectuării concediului sau poate formula această cerere şi în timpul/ după efectuarea concediului, atât timp cât este respectat termenul de 8 săptămâni de la naşterea copilului?

Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 19 mai 2025.