Preliminary ruling referral on protection orders against legally incapacitated persons inadmissible.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice (Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie), sitting as a panel for the preliminary ruling on questions of law, dismissed as inadmissible the referral from the Brăila Tribunal (Civil Section I) in Case No. 374/196/2026, thereby refusing to answer the two questions posed regarding the interpretation of Article 12(1) of Law No. 26/2024 on protection orders. The referral sought to clarify whether the phrase "from another person" in that provision could include persons subject to the guardianship measure of special tutelage (i.e., persons lacking legal capacity), and, if so, under what conditions a protection order could be issued against such a person; because the referral was declared inadmissible, no substantive guidance was given and the lower court's query stands unresolved. The decision was rendered mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, meaning the ruling binds future courts on the admissibility point only. The legal basis for the dismissal lies in the procedural rules governing the preliminary ruling mechanism, specifically the requirement that a referral must meet admissibility criteria before the court can address the merits of the interpretive questions.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 12 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 26/2024, Art. 521 alin. (3) C. pr. civ; Preliminary ruling referral on protection orders against legally incapacitated persons inadmissible: 374/196/2026, thereby refusing to answer the two questions posed regarding the interpretation of Article 12(1) of Law No. 26/2024 on protection orders. The referral sought to clarify whether the phrase "from another person" in that provision could include persons subject to the guardianship measure of special tutelage (i.e., persons lacking legal capacity), and, if so, under what conditions a protection order could be issued against such a person; because the referral was declared inadmissible, no substantive guidance was given and the lower court's query stands unresolved. The decision was rendered mandatory under Article 521(3) of the Civil Procedure Code, meaning the ruling binds future courts on the admissibility point only. The legal basis for the dismissal lies in the procedural rules governing the preliminary ruling mechanism, specifically the requirement that a referral must meet admissibility criteria before the court can address the merits of the interpretive questions.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedCited in the dispositive as the basis for declaring the referral binding.
Full text
ROMÂNIA
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept
Minuta deciziei nr. 73 Dosar nr. 219/1/2026
Ședința din 18 mai 2026
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE:
Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Tribunalul Brăila - Secţia I civilă, în Dosarul nr. 374/196/2026, în vederea pronunţării unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarelor chestiuni de drept:
Interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 12 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 26/2024 privind ordinul de protecție, cu modificările și completările ulterioare, respectiv dacă sintagma „din partea unei alte persoane”, utilizată de textul de lege, poate viza și persoane față de care a fost instituită măsura de ocrotire a tutelei speciale, respectiv persoane lipsite de capacitate de exercițiu?
În caz afirmativ, în ce condiții poate fi emis un ordin de protecție față de o asemenea persoană?
Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.
Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 18 mai 2026.