Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_226636 AI generated

Inadmissibility of preliminary referral on statute of limitations start date for public sector salary claims

Case Number ICCJ_226636
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 (ICCJ) dismissed as inadmissible the connected preliminary referral questions submitted by the Cluj Court of Appeal, thereby leaving the lower courts without a binding interpretation from the cassation instance regarding the specific issues raised. The dispute concerned the applicable statute of limitations for unclaimed salary rights, specifically distinguishing between personnel governed by the framework law on public sector salaries and civil servants, with the appellate court seeking clarification on whether the limitation period began upon the employee's awareness of the right or upon the date the payments were due. The court's decision rests on the procedural inadmissibility of the referrals under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, which mandates that such referrals only be accepted if the issues were raised and analyzed by the lower instance courts, a procedural requirement the referring court failed to satisfy.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Inadmissibility of preliminary referral on statute of limitations start date for public sector salary claims: The dispute concerned the applicable statute of limitations for unclaimed salary rights, specifically distinguishing between personnel governed by the framework law on public sector salaries and civil servants, with the appellate court seeking clarification on whether the limitation period began upon the employee's awareness of the right or upon the date the payments were due. The court's decision rests on the procedural inadmissibility of the referrals under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, which mandates that such referrals only be accepted if the issues were raised and analyzed by the lower instance courts, a procedural requirement the referring court failed to satisfy.

Keywords

AI generated
reference for a preliminary ruling limitation periods rights of civil servants preliminary question procedural requirement Civil Procedure Code

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural basis cited in the dispositive to justify the dismissal of the referrals as inadmissible and to establish the mandatory nature of the decision.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 203/2025
Salary Limitation Start Held Question of Fact; Preliminary Ruling Referrals Inadmissible
Decizia nr. 56/2018
Referral for preliminary ruling on retroactive application of salary equalization measures to public sector staff entitled to prior judicial increases declared inadmissible for lack of legal novelty.
ICCJ_230685
Preliminary ruling referral inadmissible; prior salary-law decision stands
ICCJ_230276
Referral for preliminary ruling on salary rights of suspended public servants inadmissible.
ICCJ_192466
Inadmissibility of preliminary reference on whether fiscal and salary legislation prohibits diminution of net income

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Procedural basis cited in the dispositive to justify the dismissal of the referrals as inadmissible and to establish the mandatory nature of the decision.

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. 203 Dosar nr. 563/1/2025

Ședința din 26 mai 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibile, sesizările conexate formulate de Curtea de Apel Cluj - Secţia a III-a contencios administrativ şi fiscal, în dosarele nr. 494/84/2024 şi nr. 344/100/2023, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la următoarele întrebări:

În cazul drepturilor salariale neacordate personalului prevăzut de anexa nr. VI la Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017 privind salarizarea personalului plătit din fonduri publice, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, termenul de prescripţie începe să curgă de la data când titularul dreptului la acţiune a cunoscut sau, după împrejurări, trebuia să cunoască naşterea dreptului său potrivit art. 2.523 din Codul civil sau de la data când acestea trebuiau plătite, potrivit art. 62 din anexa nr. VI la Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017?

În cazul drepturilor salariale neacordate funcţionarilor publici, termenul de prescripţie începe să curgă de la data când titularul dreptului la acţiune a cunoscut sau, după împrejurări, trebuia să cunoască naşterea dreptului său potrivit art. 2.523 din Codul civil sau de la data când acestea trebuiau plătite, potrivit art. 171 din Codul muncii?

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 26 mai 2025.