Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_212020 AI generated

In-house legal advisers need not be registered in professional roster to represent clients; highest court settles split in interest of law.

Case Number ICCJ_212020
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the appeal in the interest of the law filed by the prosecutor general and definitively established that, under Articles 5 and 20 of Law No. 514/2003 on the organization and exercise of the legal adviser profession, legal representation activities may be performed by legal advisers—whether public officials or employees under individual employment contracts—regardless of whether they are registered in the professional roster of legal advisers kept by the Romanian Colleges of Legal Advisers. The dispute concerned the divergent interpretation of whether registration in the professional table is a mandatory precondition for the validity of legal representation by in-house legal advisers. The Court ruled that such registration is not required for the exercise of the profession by salaried legal advisers, and the decision is binding under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 20 din Legea nr. 514/2003, Art. 5 și art. 20 din Legea nr. 514/2003, Art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă; In-house legal advisers need not be registered in professional roster to represent clients; highest court settles split in interest of law: 514/2003 on the organization and exercise of the legal adviser profession, legal representation activities may be performed by legal advisers—whether public officials or employees under individual employment contracts—regardless of whether they are registered in the professional roster of legal advisers kept by the Romanian Colleges of Legal Advisers. The dispute concerned the divergent interpretation of whether registration in the professional table is a mandatory precondition for the validity of legal representation by in-house legal advisers. The Court ruled that such registration is not required for the exercise of the profession by salaried legal advisers, and the decision is binding under Article 517(4) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Keywords

AI generated
legal representation public employment law civil register disqualification of attorney registration procedure contract interpretation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 20 din Legea nr. 514/2003
5 și art. 20 din Legea nr.
Art. 5 și art. 20 din Legea nr. 514/2003
Main ground of the decision, establishing the uniform interpretation that legal representation can be performed by legal counsel regardless of registration in the professional register.
Art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă
Procedural provision cited in the dispositive making the decision binding.
AI generated
ICCJ_213694
Legal advisor's right to court representation without mandatory registration in the professional table: interpretation of Law no. 514/2003 Arts. 5 and 20
ICCJ_86186
Cassation in the interest of the law admitted; registration of commercial companies for legal consulting and representation declared inadmissible
Decizia nr. 3963/2014
Trainee lawyer's registration upheld as accounting expert role found compatible, premature challenge dismissed.
Decizia nr. 244/2023
Validity of in-house legal advisor’s representation: sufficiency of authorization for corporate appeal standing
Decizia nr. 3563/2017
Incompatibility of insolvency practitioners before courts with judicial relatives; non-cumulation of legal advisor and insolvency practitioner roles

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 5 și art. 20 din Legea nr. 514/2003

Main ground of the decision, establishing the uniform interpretation that legal representation can be performed by legal counsel regardless of registration in the professional register.

Art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă

Procedural provision cited in the dispositive making the decision binding.

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 soluționarea recursului în interesul legii

Minuta deciziei nr. 7 Dosar nr. 390/1/2024

Şedinţa din 22 aprilie 2024

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

DECIDE:

Admite recursul în interesul legii formulat de procurorul general al Parchetului de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție şi, în consecinţă, stabileşte că:

În interpretarea și aplicarea unitară a dispozițiilor art. 5 și art. 20 din Legea nr. 514/2003 privind organizarea și exercitarea profesiei de consilier juridic, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare, prestarea activității specifice, de reprezentare juridică, se poate realiza de către consilieri juridici, în calitatea lor de funcționari publici sau de angajați cu contract individual de muncă, independent de înscrierea acestora în Tabloul profesional al consilierilor juridici ținut de Colegiile Consilierilor Juridici din România.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 517 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură civilă.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 22 aprilie 2024.