Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 2407/2021 AI generated

Transfer request on legitimate suspicion remitted to Suceava Court of Appeal as territorial competent court.

Case Number Decizia nr. 2407/2021
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 declined its own jurisdiction and transferred the case to the Suceava Court of Appeal, which is the competent court to rule on the applicant's request for the transfer (strămutare) of a civil case pending before the Botoșani District Court. The applicant had invoked grounds of legitimate suspicion to seek the case's transfer. The Court held that, under Article 142(1) of the Civil Procedure Code, a transfer request based on legitimate suspicion falls within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal in whose territorial circuit the lower court is located; since the Botoșani District Court is in the Suceava Court of Appeal's circuit and no circumstances suggested the parties' or the lower court's judges' connection to that appellate court, the High Court applied Article 132 of the Civil Procedure Code and declined jurisdiction in favor of the Suceava Court of Appeal. No appeal is available against this decision.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ, art. 132 C. proc. civ; Transfer request on legitimate suspicion remitted to Suceava Court of Appeal as territorial competent court: The applicant had invoked grounds of legitimate suspicion to seek the case's transfer. The Court held that, under Article 142(1) of the Civil Procedure Code, a transfer request based on legitimate suspicion falls within the jurisdiction of the court of appeal in whose territorial circuit the lower court is located; since the Botoșani District Court is in the Suceava Court of Appeal's circuit and no circumstances suggested the parties' or the lower court's judges' connection to that appellate court, the High Court applied Article 132 of the Civil Procedure Code and declined jurisdiction in favor of the Suceava Court of Appeal. No appeal is available against this decision.

Keywords

AI generated
territorial jurisdiction grounds for cassation article of civil procedure rules of procedure e-justice transfer of tenancy

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ
Used to determine that the Court of Appeal, not the High Court, is the competent court to hear the motion for transfer.
art. 132 C. proc. civ
Applied to decline jurisdiction in favor of the competent court.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 860/2016
Transfer of case for legitimate suspicion vested in court of appeal, not High Court; request sent to Suceava Court of Appeal
Decizia nr. 2340/2016
Transfer of case for legitimate suspicion within appellate court's jurisdiction granted; High Court declines jurisdiction and remits to Suceava Court of Appeal.
Decizia nr. 817/2015
Transfer request ruled outside High Court's jurisdiction; case remitted to Suceava Court of Appeal as competent forum.
Decizia nr. 1097/2020
Transfer motion sent to Suceava Court of Appeal as competent forum for suspicion-based case relocation
Decizia nr. 1377/2021
Jurisdiction to review judicial transfer request based on legitimate suspicion declined

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 132 C. proc. civ.

Applied to decline jurisdiction in favor of the competent court.

Art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ.

Used to determine that the Court of Appeal, not the High Court, is the competent court to hear the motion for transfer.

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

Şedinţa publică din data de 11 noiembrie 2021

Asupra cererii de strămutare, constată următoarele:

Prin cererea înregistrată la 23 septembrie 2021 pe rolul Înaltei Curţi de Casaţie şi Justiţie, secţia I civilă, petentul A. a solicitat strămutarea procesului civil ce formează obiectul dosarului nr. x/2017, aflat pe rolul Judecătoriei Botoşani.

Potrivit art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ., "Cererea de strămutare întemeiată pe motive de bănuială legitimă este de competenţa curţii de apel, dacă instanţa de la care se cere strămutarea este o judecătorie sau un tribunal din circumscripţia acesteia."

Se constată că, în susţinerea cererii de strămutare, au fost invocate motive de bănuială legitimă, iar cererea priveşte strămutarea unui dosar înregistrat pe rolul Judecătoriei Botoşani, instanţă aflată în circumscripţia teritorială a Curţii de Apel Suceava, nefiind indicii cu privire la calitatea de judecător a părţilor la o instanţă din circumscripţia curţii de apel competente, precum şi cu privire la calitatea de parte a unei instanţe din circumscripţia aceleiaşi curţi.

Pentru aceste considerente, în aplicarea dispoziţiilor art. 132 C. proc. civ., raportat la prevederile art. 142 alin. (1) C. proc. civ., Înalta Curte constată că instanţa competentă material a soluţiona cererea de strămutare este Curtea de Apel Suceava, în favoarea căreia va dispune declinarea de competenţă.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Declină competenţa de soluţionare a cererii formulate de petentul A. privind strămutarea procesului civil ce formează obiectul dosarului nr. x/2017 al Judecătoriei Botoşani, în favoarea Curţii de Apel Suceava.

Fără cale de atac.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică, astăzi, 11 noiembrie 2021.