Post by account_disabled on Dec 31, 2023 2:17:06 GMT -5
Asee mutatis mutandis Decision no. of February published in the Official Gazette of Romania Part I no. of March . Thus the lack of possibility of the seized third party to file an appeal against the execution does not constitute a limitation of the free access to justice as long as the seized third party cannot be forced to pay the seized sums except on the basis of the decision validating the seizure and this decision is pronounced with his summons within which he has complete freedom to formulate any defense he deems necessary. Moreover against the.
Validation decision the seized third party can file an appeal Country Email List according to the law. It therefore follows that the criticized provisions in conjunction with those that configure the legal regime of the institution of seizure validation establish procedural mechanisms designed to give full effectiveness to the constitutional norms that enshrine free access to justice the right to a fair trial and the right to defense in the sense established by the Court in its constant jurisprudence without raising the issue of a violation or restriction of these rights. . For the reasons stated pursuant to art. letter d and art. para. of the Constitution of art. of art. paragraph lit. Ad and of art. of Law no. with unanimity of votes.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT in the unfounded the exception of unconstitutionality raised by Ungureanu Ioana and Mocanu Anioara in File no. . of the Ploiesti Court and notes that the provisions of art. para. of the Civil Procedure Code are constitutional in relation to the criticisms formulated. Definitive and generally binding. The decision is communicated to the Ploiesti Court and published in the Official Gazette of Romania Part I. Pronounced in the meeting on October . THE PRESIDENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT university professor Dr. VALER DORNEANU First Assistant.
Validation decision the seized third party can file an appeal Country Email List according to the law. It therefore follows that the criticized provisions in conjunction with those that configure the legal regime of the institution of seizure validation establish procedural mechanisms designed to give full effectiveness to the constitutional norms that enshrine free access to justice the right to a fair trial and the right to defense in the sense established by the Court in its constant jurisprudence without raising the issue of a violation or restriction of these rights. . For the reasons stated pursuant to art. letter d and art. para. of the Constitution of art. of art. paragraph lit. Ad and of art. of Law no. with unanimity of votes.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT in the unfounded the exception of unconstitutionality raised by Ungureanu Ioana and Mocanu Anioara in File no. . of the Ploiesti Court and notes that the provisions of art. para. of the Civil Procedure Code are constitutional in relation to the criticisms formulated. Definitive and generally binding. The decision is communicated to the Ploiesti Court and published in the Official Gazette of Romania Part I. Pronounced in the meeting on October . THE PRESIDENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT university professor Dr. VALER DORNEANU First Assistant.