Legislator Case Law & Legislation
ICCJ_229618 AI generated

Scope of one-year prescription for insurance claims with written enforceable titles

Case Number ICCJ_229618
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Brăila Tribunal. The dispute concerned the interpretation of the one-year special statute of limitations for insurance claims under Article 2,520(1)(6) of the Civil Code and Article 706 of the Code of Civil Procedure, specifically whether this short limitation period applies exclusively to claims not established by a written act constituting an enforceable title. The court did not address the merits of the legal question, resolving the matter solely on procedural grounds by finding the referral inadmissible, thereby leaving the lower court's position on the issue unchanged pending further review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă; Scope of one-year prescription for insurance claims with written enforceable titles: The dispute concerned the interpretation of the one-year special statute of limitations for insurance claims under Article 2,520(1)(6) of the Civil Code and Article 706 of the Code of Civil Procedure, specifically whether this short limitation period applies exclusively to claims not established by a written act constituting an enforceable title. The court did not address the merits of the legal question, resolving the matter solely on procedural grounds by finding the referral inadmissible, thereby leaving the lower court's position on the issue unchanged pending further review.

Keywords

AI generated
enforceable title limitation periods article of civil procedure scope of review in cassation duration of insurance entitlement matter in dispute

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă
Cited in the dispositive to establish the binding nature of the 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 binding nature of the 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. 340 Dosar nr. 717/1/2025

Ședința din 29 septembrie 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Brăila - Secția I civilă în dosarul nr. 15447/196/2023, în vederea pronunțării unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la următoarea chestiune de drept:

Interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 2.520 alin. (1) pct. 6 din Codul civil şi art. 706 din Codul de procedură civilă, în sensul de a se stabili dacă termenul special de prescripţie de un an prevăzut de art. 2.520 alin. (1) pct. 6 din Codul civil se aplică doar în cazul acelor creanţe care nu sunt constatate prin act scris, care constituie potrivit legii, titlu executoriu.

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

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 29 septembrie 2025.