Legislator Case Law & Legislation
Încheierea nr. 511/2013 AI generated

Motion to transfer venue admitted; case reassigned to Zalău District Court with prior acts preserved.

Case Number Încheierea nr. 511/2013
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the motion to transfer venue filed by the petitioner, ordering that the civil case underlying File No. 3117/246/2012 be transferred from the Ineu District Court to the Zalău District Court, while preserving all acts performed before the transfer; this decision is final and without appeal. The case arose from a request by a company's branch to relocate a pending civil proceeding, with the assigned judge and the Public Ministry supporting the motion. Legally, the court applied the provisions on case transfer under the applicable civil procedure code, considering the procedural posture (the underlying file had been stayed) and the grounds favoring a change of venue, with the Ministerul Public concurring in the admission of the request.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 40 alin. (2) C. proc. civ; Motion to transfer venue admitted; case reassigned to Zalău District Court with prior acts preserved: 3117/246/2012 be transferred from the Ineu District Court to the Zalău District Court, while preserving all acts performed before the transfer; this decision is final and without appeal. The case arose from a request by a company's branch to relocate a pending civil proceeding, with the assigned judge and the Public Ministry supporting the motion. Legally, the court applied the provisions on case transfer under the applicable civil procedure code, considering the procedural posture (the underlying file had been stayed) and the grounds favoring a change of venue, with the Ministerul Public concurring in the admission of the request.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Code grounds for cassation procedural orders transfer of tenancy public order grounds e-justice
AI generated

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 40 alin. (2) C. proc. civ.

Cited in the reasoning to note the case was suspended; not cited in the dispositive orders.

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

S-a luat în examinare cererea de strămutare formulată de petenta SC R.I.F.N. SA - sucursala Arad.

La apelul nominal lipsesc petenta SC R.I.F.N. SA - sucursala Arad, intimații I.L., B.E.J. - D.D.M.

Ministerul Public este reprezentat de procuror L.V.

Procedura de citare este legal îndeplinită.

Se referă de magistratul asistent că, potrivit programului de evidență informatizată a instanțelor, dosarul ce face obiectul cererii de strămutare a fost suspendat în temeiul dispozițiilor art. 40 alin. (2) C. proc. civ. din data de 29 noiembrie 2012.

Reprezentanta Ministerului Public pune concluzii de admitere a cererii de strămutare.

Analizând cererea,

ÎNALTA CURTE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D I S P U N E

Admite cererea formulată de petenta SC R.I.F.N. SA - sucursala Arad privind strămutarea procesului civil ce formează obiectul Dosarului nr. 3117/246/2012 al Judecătoriei Ineu.

Strămută judecata cauzei de la Judecătoria Ineu la Judecătoria Zalău.

Păstrează actele îndeplinite de instanță înainte de strămutare.

Fără cale de atac.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi, 6 februarie 2013.