Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_228134 AI generated

Retroactive salary adjustments for mayor’s staff left unresolved; preliminary-ruling referral inadmissible.

Case Number ICCJ_228134
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 (Romania) dismissed as inadmissible the joined preliminary-ruling referrals from the Oradea and Piteşti Courts of Appeal, thereby refusing to answer whether the amendments introduced by Law No. 103/2023 to the framework Law No. 153/2017 (and its interplay with OUG No. 130/2021) allow the retroactive adjustment of the base salaries of specialized staff of the mayor and of public officials (for the period before the law's entry into force, i.e., starting 1 November 2022), or only prospectively. The referral was rejected as inadmissible, so no preliminary ruling on the merits was issued; the decision is binding under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code. The underlying administrative disputes concerned the legality of retroactive salary adjustments for local government staff following changes to the mayor's and deputy mayor's indemnities. The Court found the questions did not meet the statutory admissibility conditions for a preliminary ruling (specifically, the requirement of a genuine interpretive difficulty or relevance to the pending cases).

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Retroactive salary adjustments for mayor’s staff left unresolved; preliminary-ruling referral inadmissible: 103/2023 to the framework Law No. 153/2017 (and its interplay with OUG No. 130/2021) allow the retroactive adjustment of the base salaries of specialized staff of the mayor and of public officials (for the period before the law's entry into force, i.e., starting 1 November 2022), or only prospectively. The referral was rejected as inadmissible, so no preliminary ruling on the merits was issued; the decision is binding under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code. The underlying administrative disputes concerned the legality of retroactive salary adjustments for local government staff following changes to the mayor's and deputy mayor's indemnities. The Court found the questions did not meet the statutory admissibility conditions for a preliminary ruling (specifically, the requirement of a genuine interpretive difficulty or relevance to the pending cases).

Keywords

AI generated
public officials retroactivity of a law preliminary ruling procedure preliminary decision adjustment of remuneration framework decision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited to declare the referrals inadmissible and to make the decision binding.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 276/2025
Retroactive application of salary increase to municipal staff following change in mayor’s allowance
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_220709
Salary increase referrals partly inadmissible; no retroactive pay for specialists before implementing order
ICCJ_229642
Referral on civil servant salary adjustments rejected as inadmissible

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited to declare the referrals inadmissible and to make the decision binding.

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. 276 Dosar nr. 3027/1/2024

Şedinţa din 30 iunie 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibile, sesizările conexate formulate de Curtea de Apel Oradea – Secţia de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, în dosarul nr. 1178/83/2023, şi de Curtea de Apel Piteşti – Secţia a II-a civilă, de contencios administrativ şi fiscal, în dosarul nr. 3868/109/2023, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la următoarele întrebări:

Articolul unic din Legea nr. 103/2023, coroborat cu prevederile art. 11 alin. (1)-(4) din Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017, se interpretează în sensul că modificarea indemnizaţiei primarului şi viceprimarului pentru o perioadă anterioară intrării în vigoare a Legii nr. 103/2023 (în mod retroactiv) permite ca modificarea corespunzătoare a salariilor de bază ale personalului din aparatul de specialitate al primarului să fie efectuată retroactiv pentru respectiva perioadă anterioară intrării în vigoare a Legii nr. 103/2023 sau, dimpotrivă, o atare modificare poate opera exclusiv pentru perioada ulterioară intrării în vigoare a Legii nr. 103/2023?

În interpretarea art. 11 alin. (1) şi alin. (4) din Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017 şi art. I alin. (44) din Ordonanţa de urgentă a Guvernului nr. 130/2021, introdus prin Legea nr. 103/2023, aceste din urmă dispoziţii determină obligarea consiliului local să modifice în mod corespunzător salarizarea şi pentru categoria de personal funcţionari publici, salarizat potrivit art. 11 alin. (1) din Legea-cadru nr. 153/2017, începând cu data de 1 noiembrie 2022?

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 30 iunie 2025.