Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_229566 AI generated

Admissibility of preliminary ruling on equal pension treatment for accounting counselors versus judges under Law 94/1992

Case Number ICCJ_229566
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 rejected as inadmissible the request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Bucharest Court of Appeal, leaving the original proceedings to determine the merits without a binding interpretation from the supreme court. The dispute concerned the application of Article 49(4) of Law No. 94/1992 regarding the calculation method for disability pensions, specifically whether accounting counselors should receive the same pension treatment as judges following Constitutional Court Decision No. 297/2012. The decisive legal basis for the rejection was the procedural admissibility requirements for binding pretrial rulings under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the submitting court failed to satisfy in raising the question of law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 49 alin. (4) din Legea nr. 94/1992, art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Admissibility of preliminary ruling on equal pension treatment for accounting counselors versus judges under Law 94/1992: The dispute concerned the application of Article 49(4) of Law No. 94/1992 regarding the calculation method for disability pensions, specifically whether accounting counselors should receive the same pension treatment as judges following Constitutional Court Decision No. 297/2012. The decisive legal basis for the rejection was the procedural admissibility requirements for binding pretrial rulings under Article 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the submitting court failed to satisfy in raising the question of law.

Keywords

AI generated
pension rights preliminary decision preliminary ruling procedure constitutional equality procedural rights equal treatment

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 49 alin. (4) din Legea nr. 94/1992
Respinge ca inadmisibilă sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel București – Secţia a VII-a pentru cauze privind conflicte de muncă și asigurări sociale în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile privind chestiunea de drept a interpretării art. 49 alin.
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
The procedural basis cited in the dispositive to establish that the court's decision is obligatory and binding for the referring court.
AI generated
ICCJ_142108
Scope of "service pension established under court decisions" covering administrative recalculations of pensioners under Law 94/1992
Decizia nr. 366/2025
Preliminary ruling on pension inclusion of salary rights inadmissible as no genuine legal question and prior decisions govern.
ICCJ_146165
Admissibility of preliminary ruling on pension recalculation under Article 1691 Law 263/2010
ICCJ_149455
Admissibility of preliminary ruling on retroactive application of supplementary law to former judicial staff pensions
ICCJ_232191
Admissibility of preliminary reference on alleged occupational discrimination in social security contributions and pension options for military prosecutors

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

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

The procedural basis cited in the dispositive to establish that the court's decision is obligatory and binding for the referring court.

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. 318 Dosar nr. 802/1/2025

Ședința din 22 septembrie 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge ca inadmisibilă sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel București – Secţia a VII-a pentru cauze privind conflicte de muncă și asigurări sociale în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile privind chestiunea de drept a interpretării art. 49 alin. (4) din Legea nr. 94/1992 în sensul de a ști dacă, în lumina deciziei Curții Constituționale nr. 297/2012, consilierii de conturi beneficiază de același tratament cu al judecătorilor sub aspectul modului de stabilire a cuantumului pensiei de invaliditate.

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

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 22 septembrie 2025.