High Court of Cassation and Justice has decided that to resolve the conflict of laws rules in case of a change of regulations regarding the foreclosure procedures, the legislator does not regard the date on which the instrument whose enforcement is sought has become or may become enforceable, but the date on which the creditor notified the enforcement body under Article. 622 para. (2) NCPC. In this case, the file execution was formed based on the application of foreclosure submitted before the entry into force of the NCPC, so that the provisions in question are former provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, namely the provisions of art. 460 according to which the garnishment validation is in the court competence. Therefore become applicable provisions of art. 453 para. (1) of the old Code of Civil Procedure, in conjunction with art. 373 para. (2) which provide an alternative jurisdiction of the executor of the debtor’s domicile or registered third party withheld choice of jurisdiction belonging to the creditor, which in the present case, notified the court in whose territorial jurisdiction it has its registered third party withheld. (Decision no. 475 of 17 February 2015 Section I pronounced the Civil High Court of Cassation and Justice covering negative conflict of jurisdiction).
:: The Source: JURIDICE.ro
