Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_234606 AI generated

Scope of RCA insurer liability: coverage for damages arising from intentional criminal acts in road accidents

Case Number ICCJ_234606
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 reference question submitted by the Bucharest Court of Appeal, Penal Section II, thereby denying a ruling on the legal issue and leaving the proceedings to continue under existing interpretations. The dispute concerned the interpretation of Article 10(1) of Law No. 132/2017 regarding mandatory third-party auto liability insurance (RCA), specifically whether the insurer’s civil liability coverage is limited exclusively to damages caused by negligent traffic offenses or also extends to damages resulting from intentional criminal acts committed in road accidents involving insured vehicles. The court’s decision to reject the reference as inadmissible serves as the final operative outcome, preventing a uniform legal clarification on the scope of RCA liability regarding intentional torts under the referenced statute.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 10 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 132/2017, art.477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Scope of RCA insurer liability: coverage for damages arising from intentional criminal acts in road accidents: The dispute concerned the interpretation of Article 10(1) of Law No. 132/2017 regarding mandatory third-party auto liability insurance (RCA), specifically whether the insurer’s civil liability coverage is limited exclusively to damages caused by negligent traffic offenses or also extends to damages resulting from intentional criminal acts committed in road accidents involving insured vehicles. The court’s decision to reject the reference as inadmissible serves as the final operative outcome, preventing a uniform legal clarification on the scope of RCA liability regarding intentional torts under the referenced statute.

Keywords

AI generated
liability of accident insurer road traffic law interpretation of a judgment third-party proceedings damages from traffic accident insurance of third party

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 10 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 132/2017
3608/93/2022, în vederea pronunțării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept: „Dacă dispoziţiile art. 10 alin.
art.477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală
Cited in the final paragraph of the decision to establish the mandatory effect of the ruling from the date of publication in the Official Monitor.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 44/2026
RCA insurance coverage scope: whether mandatory civil liability insurance includes damages from intentional offenses committed during vehicular accidents, and the admissibility of preliminary reference claims lacking a genuine legal ambiguity
Decizia nr. 974/2021
Liability of RCA insurer for intentional vehicular homicide under Law 136/1995 and EU victim protection directives
Decizia nr. 1758/2017
Scope of RCA insurer's liability under common law versus administrative caps for moral and incidental damages
ICCJ_87071
RCA insurer liability persists despite criminal settlement: admissibility of civil damages claims when action extinguished by reconciliation
Decizia nr. 2165/2022
RCA accident damages: application of insurance law in force at policy inception and mandatory specific motivation for moral damage quantum

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art.477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală

Cited in the final paragraph of the decision to establish the mandatory effect of the ruling from the date of publication in the Official Monitor.

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. 44 Dosar nr. 2587/1/2025

Ședința din 23 martie 2026

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de către Curtea de Apel București-Secția a-II-a penală, în dosarul nr. 3608/93/2022, în vederea pronunțării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept: „Dacă dispoziţiile art. 10 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 132/2017 privind asigurarea de răspundere civilă auto se interpretează în sensul că răspunderea civilă a asigurătorului RCA acoperă exclusiv prejudiciile cauzate prin săvârşirea unor infracţiuni din culpă sau, din contră, aceasta acoperă și prejudiciile rezultate din infracțiuni intenționate, atunci când aceste infracțiuni sunt săvârșite în cadrul accidentelor rutiere în care sunt implicate vehicule asigurate RCA.”

Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art.477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 23 martie 2026.