Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_230682 AI generated

Main intervention in procurement complaint appeals held admissible under Law No. 101/2016

Case Number ICCJ_230682
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the appeal in the interest of the law filed by the Board of the Bacău Court of Appeal and held that a main intervention request filed in a challenge pending before the National Council for the Resolution of Complaints is admissible, providing a binding interpretation of Articles 3(1)(a), 8, and 17(3) of Law No. 101/2016 on remedies and appeals in public procurement, sectoral contracts, and concession contracts. The decision resolves a procedural dispute over whether third-party intervention is permitted in administrative complaints before the Council, ruling that such intervention is admissible despite the absence of express provisions in the law, based on the principles of procedural economy and the effectiveness of remedies under the relevant procurement legislation. The ruling is binding under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code and was pronounced in a public hearing on November 17, 2025.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 17 alin. (3) din Legea nr. 101/2016, art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; Main intervention in procurement complaint appeals held admissible under Law No. 101/2016: 101/2016 on remedies and appeals in public procurement, sectoral contracts, and concession contracts. The decision resolves a procedural dispute over whether third-party intervention is permitted in administrative complaints before the Council, ruling that such intervention is admissible despite the absence of express provisions in the law, based on the principles of procedural economy and the effectiveness of remedies under the relevant procurement legislation. The ruling is binding under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code and was pronounced in a public hearing on November 17, 2025.

Keywords

AI generated
public procurement procedure Civil Procedure Code administrative complaint contracting party public hearing rulings providing an interpretation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 17 alin. (3) din Legea nr. 101/2016
art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Used to establish the mandatory effect of the decision.
AI generated
ICCJ_232872
Admissibility of primary voluntary intervention in pending public procurement litigation
Decizia nr. 2767/2021
Procurement complaint ruling final; appeal over late filing inadmissible with bad-faith fine.
Decizia nr. 187/2023
Exclusion of cassation appeal in public procurement contract enforcement disputes under Law No. 101/2016
Decizia nr. 4457/2024
Public procurement litigation: withdrawal of appeal against procedural suspension of complaint proceedings pending definitive administrative review
Decizia nr. 243/2025
Recourse inadmissible against final public procurement dispute decision restricting appeal to single instance under Law 101/2016

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 3 alin. (1) lit. a), art. 8 şi art. 17 alin. (3) din Legea nr. 101/2016

Basis for the interpretation and uniform application regarding the admissibility of the main intervention request.

art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă

Used to establish the mandatory effect 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 soluționarea recursului în interesul legii

Minuta deciziei nr. 23 Dosar nr. 1955/1/2025

Ședința din 17 noiembrie 2025

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite recursul în interesul legii formulat de Colegiul de conducere al Curţii de Apel Bacău.

În interpretarea și aplicarea unitară art. 3 alin. (1) lit. a), art. 8 şi art. 17 alin. (3) din Legea nr. 101/2016 privind remediile și căile de atac în materie de atribuire a contractelor de achiziție publică, a contractelor sectoriale și a contractelor de concesiune de lucrări și concesiune de servicii, precum și pentru organizarea și funcţionarea Consiliului Naţional de Soluționare a Contestațiilor, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare stabileşte că:

Cererea de intervenție principală formulată în cadrul unei contestații pendinte pe rolul Consiliului Naţional de Soluționare a Contestațiilor este admisibilă.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 17 noiembrie 2025.