Legislator Case Law & Legislation
ICCJ_228073 AI generated

Admissibility of reference for clarification on entitlement of penitentiary officials opting for education/health salary scale to receive specific allowances under Framework Law No. 153/2017

Case Number ICCJ_228073
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the reference for clarification submitted by the Cluj County Court regarding a specific interpretation of labor law provisions. The underlying dispute concerned whether special-status public officials in the penitentiary system, who had opted for a basic salary level corresponding to the education and health occupational families under Framework Law No. 153/2017, were entitled to the specific allowances detailed in Article 12(2) of Annex VI to the same law. The Court ruled that the question of law was inadmissible, meaning the referring court must resolve the issue itself, and the decision is mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Admissibility of reference for clarification on entitlement of penitentiary officials opting for education/health salary scale to receive specific allowances under Framework Law No. 153/2017: The underlying dispute concerned whether special-status public officials in the penitentiary system, who had opted for a basic salary level corresponding to the education and health occupational families under Framework Law No. 153/2017, were entitled to the specific allowances detailed in Article 12(2) of Annex VI to the same law. The Court ruled that the question of law was inadmissible, meaning the referring court must resolve the issue itself, and the decision is mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Keywords

AI generated
salary classification public official family allowances interpretation of the law framework decision status of official

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the court's decision.
AI generated

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish the mandatory nature of the court's 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. 250 Dosar nr. 2970/1/2024

Ședința din 23 iunie 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge ca inadmisibilă sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Cluj - Secția mixtă de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, de conflicte de muncă și asigurări sociale privind lămurirea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

Dacă, în interpretarea art. 7 lit. m) din Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017, art. 12 alin. (2) şi art. 92 din Anexa nr. VI la Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017 și art. 150 din Codul muncii, funcționarii publici cu statut special din sistemul administrației penitenciare care au optat în locul soldei lunare brute/salariului lunar brut pentru salariul lunar brut stabilit potrivit prevederilor din familiile ocupaționale învățământ și sănătate și asistență socială, conform Anexei nr. II la aceeași lege, beneficiază de sporurile prevăzute de 12 alin. (2) din Anexa nr. VI la Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017.

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 23 iunie 2025.