Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_226643 AI generated

Pension recalculation based on pre-2001 income certificates versus labor record figures: legality of reducing benefits

Case Number ICCJ_226643
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 for the resolution of a legal issue submitted by the Vâlcea Court of Appeal, leaving the procedural posture and prior instances unaffected by this decision. The dispute concerned a public law matter under the unified pension system, specifically whether it was legal for a territorial pension fund to reduce a pensioner's benefits after a court-ordered recalculation based on income certificates from a former employer for periods prior to April 1, 2001, revealed that such income was lower than the figures from the labor record used for the initial calculation, or whether the previously established pension amount must be maintained. The decisive legal basis for the inadmissibility determination involved the interpretation and application of Articles 107 and 165(2) of Law No. 263/2010 regarding the public pension system, as well as the procedural admissibility requirements for referrals under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 165 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 263/2010, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Pension recalculation based on pre-2001 income certificates versus labor record figures: legality of reducing benefits: The dispute concerned a public law matter under the unified pension system, specifically whether it was legal for a territorial pension fund to reduce a pensioner's benefits after a court-ordered recalculation based on income certificates from a former employer for periods prior to April 1, 2001, revealed that such income was lower than the figures from the labor record used for the initial calculation, or whether the previously established pension amount must be maintained. The decisive legal basis for the inadmissibility determination involved the interpretation and application of Articles 107 and 165(2) of Law No. 263/2010 regarding the public pension system, as well as the procedural admissibility requirements for referrals under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Keywords

AI generated
recalculation of pension income determination calculation of benefit pensioner labor disputes reduction of disability pension

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 165 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 263/2010
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited to establish the binding nature of the decision to dismiss the referral.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 57/2019
Pension recalculation referrals on pre-2001 income dismissed as inadmissible for lack of novelty.
Decizia nr. 210/2025
Pension recalculation via court-mandated income substitution: whether verified income lower than labor book entries permits pension reduction
Decizia nr. 3881/2003
Pension Recalculation for Senior Work Grades: Application of Law in Force at Pension Granting vs. Subsequent Legislative Changes
Decizia nr. 1706/2022
Pension recalculation claim: Inadmissibility of cassation in social insurance matters under the exclusive appeal provision
Decizia nr. 2433/2009
Jurisdiction over pension-related service record certificates and average point recalculation claims

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited to establish the binding nature of the decision to dismiss the referral.

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. 210 Dosar nr. 293/1/2025

Ședința din 26 mai 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Vâlcea - Secţia I civilă, în dosarul nr. 2.242/90/2024, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept, referitoare la interpretarea art. 107 şi art. 165 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 263/2010 privind sistemul unitar de pensii publice, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, respectiv: dacă, în situaţia punerii în executare de către casa teritorială de pensii a unei hotărâri judecătoreşti prin care aceasta este obligată să recalculeze drepturile de pensie ale reclamantului pe baza veniturilor lunare rezultate dintr-o adeverinţă emisă de fostul angajator, aferente unor perioade anterioare datei de 01.04.2001, este legală scăderea cuantumului pensiei ca urmare a faptului că veniturile din adeverinţă se dovedesc a fi mai mici decât cele care au stat la baza calculului iniţial al pensiei, preluate din carnetul de muncă, sau, dimpotrivă, într-o astfel de situaţie se impune menţinerea în plată a cuantumului pensiei stabilit anterior?

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 26 mai 2025.