Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_211987 AI generated

Exchange-rate freeze claim referral inadmissible; appealability determination left to lower court.

Case Number ICCJ_211987
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court dismissed as inadmissible the referral by the Court of Appeal Constanța seeking a preliminary ruling on whether a claim to freeze (stabilize) the exchange rate at its value at contract conclusion, between professionals and consumers, based on art. 970 of the 1864 Civil Code and Constitutional Court Decision No. 623/2016, falls within consumer protection matters and is therefore subject to appeal on points of law (recurs) under art. 483(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The referral was rejected because the question raised did not meet the admissibility conditions for a preliminary ruling; consequently, the lower court's pending determination on the appealability of such a claim remains unaffected. The ruling was made in a procedure for the uniform interpretation of law, and the decision is binding under art. 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Exchange-rate freeze claim referral inadmissible; appealability determination left to lower court: 970 of the 1864 Civil Code and Constitutional Court Decision No. 623/2016, falls within consumer protection matters and is therefore subject to appeal on points of law (recurs) under art. 483(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The referral was rejected because the question raised did not meet the admissibility conditions for a preliminary ruling; consequently, the lower court's pending determination on the appealability of such a claim remains unaffected. The ruling was made in a procedure for the uniform interpretation of law, and the decision is binding under art. 521(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Keywords

AI generated
preliminary ruling procedure preliminary decision consumer law determination of value contract interpretation Civil Procedure Code
AI generated
Decizia nr. 13/2024
Admissibility of cassation appeal for consumer credit currency stabilization claims under Article 483(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure
Decizia nr. 906/2018
CHF-loan rate freeze claim barred by time-of-filing appeal rules as plaintiffs' appeal declared inadmissible
Decizia nr. 2549/2018
Bank loan abuse and currency risk claims: cassation appeal declared inadmissible due to transitional value threshold
Decizia nr. 470/2018
Foreign-currency loan appeal held inadmissible for value below statutory threshold.
Decizia nr. 252/2018
Foreign-currency loan appeal dismissed as inadmissible for finality under value threshold; currency-risk clauses upheld.

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

ROMÂNIA

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

Completul pentru dezlegarea unor chestiuni de drept

Minuta deciziei nr. 13 Dosar nr. 20/1/2024

Ședința din 25 martie 2024

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Constanţa - Secţia a II-a civilă, de insolvenţă şi litigii cu profesionişti şi societăţi, în dosarul nr. 9306/212/2021, pentru pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile cu privire la următoarea problemă de drept:

În interpretarea dispoziţiilor art. 483 alin. (2) din Codul de procedură civilă, capătul de cerere având ca obiect şi cererea de îngheţare (stabilizare) a cursului de schimb valutar la valoarea acestuia de la data încheierii unor contracte între profesionişti şi consumatori, întemeiat juridic pe dispoziţiile art. 970 din Codul civil din 1864 şi Decizia Curţii Constituţionale nr. 623 din 25 octombrie 2016, publicată în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, nr. 53 din 18 ianuarie 2017, se circumscrie cererilor pronunţate în materia protecţiei consumatorilor şi este sau nu supus căii de atac a recursului?

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 521 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 25 martie 2024.