Recusal scope: “court where a party is a judge” limited to the specific trial panel under Art. 42(1)(5) CPC

The High Court of Cassation and Justice, acting as the full bench for the appeal in the interest of the law, admitted the appeal and issued a binding interpretative ruling, establishing a restricted meaning for specific procedural provisions. The dispute concerned the uniform interpretation and application of civil procedure law, specifically addressing whether the phrase "the court where one of the parties is a judge" refers to the entire institution or the specific panel of judges. The decisive legal basis is Article 42(1)(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which governs recusal grounds; the Court ordered that this phrase is strictly interpreted to mean the specific panel of judges (complet de judecată) in which the party serves as a judge, rather than the court as a whole, with the decision being mandatory pursuant to Article 517(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure.