Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 3337/2010 AI generated

Prison appeal against remand order held time-barred as tardy.

Case Number Decizia nr. 3337/2010
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as tardy the appeal filed by the defendant prison against the appellate decision that had overturned a trial court ruling and remanded the case, thereby leaving the appellate decision in force and sending the matter back for re-trial. The dispute arose from a civil action brought by a plaintiff against the prison, which the trial court had annulled as unstamped, a ruling that the Court of Appeal set aside and referred back for reconsideration. The Court held that the appeal was time-barred because, under Articles 301, 101(1), and 103 of the Civil Procedure Code, the 15-day appeal period runs from communication of the decision and is calculated in free days; here, the decision was communicated on 20 November 2009, the deadline expired on 7 December 2009, and the appeal was filed only on 10 December 2009, triggering the sanction of forfeiture.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 301 C. proc. civ, art. 103 C. proc. civ, art. 101 alin. (1) C. proc. civ; Prison appeal against remand order held time-barred as tardy: The dispute arose from a civil action brought by a plaintiff against the prison, which the trial court had annulled as unstamped, a ruling that the Court of Appeal set aside and referred back for reconsideration. The Court held that the appeal was time-barred because, under Articles 301, 101(1), and 103 of the Civil Procedure Code, the 15-day appeal period runs from communication of the decision and is calculated in free days; here, the decision was communicated on 20 November 2009, the deadline expired on 7 December 2009, and the appeal was filed only on 10 December 2009, triggering the sanction of forfeiture.

Keywords

AI generated
time of filing appealability of remand decision deadline for communication forfeiture period matter in dispute excessive duration of detention

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 301 C. proc. civ
Fix the appeal deadline and time limits for calculating the law, forming the basis for declaring the appeal as tardive.
art. 103 C. proc. civ
Sanctions the failure to exercise the appeal within the procedural time limit with forfeiture, justifying the dismissal as late.
art. 101 alin. (1) C. proc. civ
Establishes the rule that time limits of the appeal are calculated in free days, as applied to determine the expiry of the term.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 1771/2012
Prisoner's late-notice appeal deemed timely, ruling quashed and remanded.
Decizia nr. 2777/2010
Tardy criminal revision appeal: dismissal for exceeding the statutory recourse deadline
Decizia nr. 307/2022
Appeal against execution dismissed as time-barred for late filing of challenge to prison sentence reduction
Decizia nr. 2771/2011
Tardiness of criminal appeal filed by detained prisoner challenging rejection of revision petition
Decizia nr. 5354/2022
Appeal against peremption declared time-barred; reinstatement request rejected

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 301 C. proc. civ.

Fix the appeal deadline and time limits for calculating the law, forming the basis for declaring the appeal as tardive.

art. 101 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Establishes the rule that time limits of the appeal are calculated in free days, as applied to determine the expiry of the term.

art. 103 C. proc. civ.

Sanctions the failure to exercise the appeal within the procedural time limit with forfeiture, justifying the dismissal as late.

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

Asupra recursului de față constată următoarele:

Prin Sentința nr. 288 din 9 iunie 2009, Tribunalul Arad, secția civilă, a anulat ca netimbrată acțiunea formulată de reclamantul M.F. împotriva pârâtului Penitenciarul Arad, sentință ce a fost desființată de Curtea de Apel Timișoara, secția civilă, care, prin Decizia nr. 206/A din 12 octombrie 2009 a dispus trimiterea cauzei pentru rejudecare la același tribunal.

Împotriva acestei din urmă decizii pârâtul a declarat prezentul recurs.

Din actele și lucrările de la dosar, Înalta Curte a reținut că decizia atacată a fost comunicată recurentului la 20 noiembrie 2009, conform dovezii din dosarul curții de apel, iar recursul a fost declarat la 10 decembrie 2009, data înregistrării sale la instanța de apel, după cum rezultă din ștampila aplicată pe cererea de recurs din dosarul Înaltei Curți de Casație și Justiție.

Așa fiind, Înalta Curte constată incidente în speță dispozițiile art. 301 C. proc. civ., conform cărora termenul de recurs este de 15 zile de la comunicarea hotărârii, termenele calculându-se, potrivit art. 101 alin. (1), pe zile libere, precum și cele ale art. 103 C. proc. civ. care sancționează cu decăderea neexercitarea căii de atac în termenul procedural.

În cauza de față recursul a fost declarat după împlinirea, la 7 decembrie 2009, a termenului sus-menționat.

În consecință, recursul se va respinge ca tardiv, cu ocazia rejudecării urmând a fi verificată poziția procesuală a reclamantului.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Respinge, ca tardiv, recursul declarat de pârâtul Penitenciarul Arad împotriva Deciziei nr. 206/A din 12 octombrie 2009 a Curții de Apel Timișoara, secția civilă.

Irevocabilă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică astăzi, 28 mai 2010.

Procesat de GGC - NN