Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
Încheierea nr. 1453/2012 KI-generiert

Venue change request for resolved appeal and associated lack of defense petition rejected under Article 156(1) of the Civil Procedure Code

Geschäftsnummer Încheierea nr. 1453/2012
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Rumänien (RO)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed the petition to change the venue of a pending civil case, ruling that the request was unfounded and the subsequent request for a new hearing due to lack of defense was also rejected, leaving the original case with the Court of Appeal of Suceava as the competent forum. The dispute involved a petitioner who filed for venue change and, after learning the original case had already been resolved by the lower court on February 22, 2012, subsequently requested a new hearing to prepare a defense, claiming the summons procedure was legally fulfilled but seeking relief from the procedural situation. The court's decisive legal basis was Article 156(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the panel applied to determine that the petition for lack of defense lacked merit given the established timeline and procedural history.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

art. 156 alin. (1) C. proc. civ; Venue change request for resolved appeal and associated lack of defense petition rejected under Article 156(1) of the Civil Procedure Code: The dispute involved a petitioner who filed for venue change and, after learning the original case had already been resolved by the lower court on February 22, 2012, subsequently requested a new hearing to prepare a defense, claiming the summons procedure was legally fulfilled but seeking relief from the procedural situation. The court's decisive legal basis was Article 156(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the panel applied to determine that the petition for lack of defense lacked merit given the established timeline and procedural history.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Zivilprozessordnung Vorladung Beschwerdelegitimation Praxisänderung E-Justice Widerspruchsverfahren

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
art. 156 alin. (1) C. proc. civ
Cited in the dispositive as the legal basis for rejecting the petition for lack of defense and the subsequent venue change request.
KI-generiert
Încheierea nr. 1421/2013
Request for change of venue denied; petition dismissed without appeal
Încheierea nr. 4131/2013
Denial of civil change of venue request in pending appellate proceedings
Încheierea nr. 7057/2012
Request for change of venue in civil proceedings: rejection for lack of statutory grounds
Încheierea nr. 6649/2012
Transfer of venue request denied due to failure to establish grounds for judicial relocation
Încheierea nr. 7130/2012
Change of venue petition denied due to procedural suspension of the underlying civil case

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
art. 156 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Cited in the dispositive as the legal basis for rejecting the petition for lack of defense and the subsequent venue change request.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

Procedura de citare este legal îndeplinită.

Se referă de magistratul-asistent asupra faptului că, potrivit programului de evidență informatizată a instanțelor Dosarul nr. 871/86/2010 al Curții de Apel Suceava a cărui strămutare se solicită a fost soluționat la data de 22 februarie 2012. Se mai referă că petentul a solicitat acordarea unui nou termen de judecată pentru pregătirea apărării, prin cererea înregistrată la 1 martie 2012.

Reprezentanta Ministerului Public solicită să se respingă cererea formulată de petent.

Deliberând, Înalta Curte respinge cererea de acordare a unui nou termen de judecată pentru lipsă de apărare formulată de petentul D.I.C., constatând că nu este întemeiată, în raport de dispozițiile art. 156 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Reprezentanta Ministerului Public pune concluzii de respingere a cererii de strămutare, ca fiind rămasă fără obiect.

Analizând cererea,

ÎNALTA CURTE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D I S P U N E

Respinge cererea formulată de petentul D.I.C. privind strămutarea pricinii care face obiectul Dosarului nr. 871/86/2010 al Curții de Apel Suceava.

Fără cale de atac.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, astăzi 1 martie 2012.

Procesat de GGC - NN