HCCJ. Action with main heads of claim that attract jurisdiction of different courts

The High Court of Cassation and Justice decided that, prorogation of jurisdiction, established by the legislature in the art. 99 para. (2) NCPC, in favor of the instance of higher tier when jurisdiction to hear the different main heads of claim instances belongs to courts of different degrees, operates only if the applications have the same nature, meaning that they attract the competence of sections or panels with the same specialization, but belonging of different degree courts. In this case, through action, was required the annulment of the provision of the AFM President on individual employment contract termination, but also the cancellation of the order given by the ruler of central public authority for environmental protection, act on which was based the provision of the AFM President. The High Court held that the extension of jurisdiction can not operate in favor of the of the appeal court, administrative and fiscal department, on all claims based on labor relations, which are, in the first instance, of competence of a specialized department of the tribunal so that, in this situation, it must be applied the solution suggested by the legislature in art. 99 para. (1) NCPC, namely the proper severing and declining jurisdiction. (Decision no. 552 of 14 February 2014 rendered in appeal by The First Civil Division of The High Court of Cassation and Justice, covering the negative conflict of competence)

:: The Source: JURIDICE.ro

Anda Laura TĂNASE

Related posts