Consideraţii privind nulitatea actului administrativ. Particularităţi în domeniul de aplicare a dispoziţiilor O.U.G. nr. 83/1999
CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE NULLITY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ACT. PARTICULARITIES IN THE SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT EMERGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 83/1999

Summary/Abstract: The scope of application of the provisions of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 83/1999 does not include “buildings that had already been demolished on the date this normative act entered into force”. A distinct situation concerns buildings demolished subsequently, after the restitution claim had been filed by the interested party. Such a situation is, in practice, equivalent to an alienation of the building; therefore, the provisions of Article 3 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 83/1999, corroborated with Article 6 para. (1) of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 94/2000, become applicable. Where the immovable properties covered by the aforementioned ordinance were lawfully alienated after 22 December 1989, the holders of restitution claims may opt for compensatory measures by equivalent, pursuant to Article 5 para. (5) of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 94/2000. This interpretation is all the more compelling since, according to Article 7 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 94/2000, applicable pursuant to Article 3 of Government Emergency Ordinance No. 83/1999, under penalty of absolute nullity, until the completion of the administrative and, where appropriate, judicial procedures provided for by that ordinance, “the alienation, change of use, mortgaging, or encumbrance in any form whatsoever of the immovable properties for which restitution claims have been filed is prohibited”. The buildings forming the subject matter of the pending dispute existed on the date the normative act regulating the restitution of certain immovable properties that had belonged to communities of citizens belonging to national minorities in Romania entered into force. Moreover, and a fortiori, those buildings also existed on the date when the restitution claim was filed by the respondent claimant. This circumstance, which is essential to the legal issue under discussion, is clearly established by the documents submitted to the case file, which were not challenged in the proceedings.

• Details
• Contents