Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_229370 AI generated

Aggregation of part-time and full-time service periods toward statutory seniority threshold for judicial appointments

Case Number ICCJ_229370
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 request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Court of Appeal of Oradea, leaving the lower court to resolve the matter independently without a binding interpretation from the supreme court. The dispute concerned whether the 25-year seniority requirement for judges and prosecutors, as stipulated in the judicial status law, could be satisfied by aggregating partial-time and full-time legal counsel work periods held with different employers. The court declined to interpret the interplay between Article 211 of Law No. 303/2022 and the Labor Code provisions on cumulative service, thereby refusing to establish a uniform legal standard on whether part-time service adds to full-time service for seniority calculation purposes.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 211 din Legea nr. 303/2022, art. 106 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 53/2003, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Aggregation of part-time and full-time service periods toward statutory seniority threshold for judicial appointments: The dispute concerned whether the 25-year seniority requirement for judges and prosecutors, as stipulated in the judicial status law, could be satisfied by aggregating partial-time and full-time legal counsel work periods held with different employers. The court declined to interpret the interplay between Article 211 of Law No. 303/2022 and the Labor Code provisions on cumulative service, thereby refusing to establish a uniform legal standard on whether part-time service adds to full-time service for seniority calculation purposes.

Keywords

AI generated
seniority judicial law calculation of years of service part-time work appointment of counsel legal working time

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 211 din Legea nr. 303/2022
Dispoziţiile art. 211 din Legea nr. 303/2022 privind statutul judecătorilor şi procurorilor, coroborate cu cele ale art.
art. 106 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 53/2003
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the court's decision regarding the inadmissibility of the reference request.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 310/2025
Cumulative part-time and full-time service periods do not count towards the 25-year judicial seniority threshold for civil service pensions
Decizia nr. 1869/2010
Judicial promotion eligibility: exclusion of non-judicial legal service periods from seniority calculation following unconstitutionality of statutory lawyer service credit
Decizia nr. 2396/2020
Judicial seniority calculation: exclusion of pre-judicial legal advisory service from salary grade classification
ICCJ_228020
Calculation of service pension seniority deadlines and retroactivity of magistrates' status law
Decizia nr. 3975/2009
Exclusion of personal advisor and jurist periods from statutory five-year legal seniority requirement for judicial appointment eligibility

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the court's decision regarding the inadmissibility of the reference request.

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. 310 Dosar nr. 414/1/2025

Ședința din 15 septembrie 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge ca inadmisibilă sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Oradea - Secţia I Civilă în Dosarul nr. 2.236/111/2023, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

Dispoziţiile art. 211 din Legea nr. 303/2022 privind statutul judecătorilor şi procurorilor, coroborate cu cele ale art. 16 alin. (5) şi art. 106 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 53/2003 - Codul muncii, republicată, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, se interpretează în sensul că, în cazul cumulului de funcţii, la calculul «vechimii de cel puţin 25 de ani realizată», vechimea de consilier juridic realizată în temeiul unui contract individual de muncă cu timp parţial se adaugă la vechimea de consilier juridic realizată în temeiul unui contract individual de muncă cu normă întreagă încheiat cu un alt angajator?

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 15 septembrie 2025.