Sesizare în vederea pronunțării unei hotărâri prealabile. Inadmisibilitate. Ordin de protecție. Revocare. Durata maximă a ordinului de protecție. Durata termenului de apel
Referral for a preliminary ruling. Inadmissibility. Protection order. Revocation. Maximum duration of the protection order. The duration of the appeal term

Summary/Abstract: Not every subject of law can be subjected to interpretation through the a priori mechanism of jurisprudence unification provided by art. 519 et seq. of the Civil Procedure Code, but the only that raises the issue of the precariousness of legal texts, of their dual and complex character. Otherwise, the role of the supreme court would become one of direct resolution of the pending case and would neutralize the role of the legally vested court, that of directly and effectively judging the process, a constitutionally enshrined role. The supreme court cannot be entrusted, within such a procedure, with the interpretation and application of the law for the purpose of the effective resolution of the pending case, an attribute that must necessarily remain within the exclusive competence of the court legally entrusted with the resolution process. In addition, the legal issue that seriously needs to be clarified must present a sufficiently high degree of difficulty, capable of justifying the need for interpretation carried out through the mediation of the supreme court for a double purpose, that of a resolution of principle and that of removing any uncertainty that could hover over the security of the legal relations deduced from the judgment. The creation of a procedural framework able to respect the rights of all those involved in the mechanism of the protection order, to offer the guarantees of a fair trial, with respect for free access to justice and without the establishment of any discrimination, by regulating an identical legal regime, in similar situations, belongs to the competence of the legislator, and not of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, whose fundamental purpose is to ensure the uniform interpretation and application of the law, through a mandatory jurisprudence, within the mechanisms of jurisprudential unification, the decision-making role conferred on the supreme court aiming to remove the doubts that persist during the interpretation and application of the rules issued by the legislator, without being able to replace them.

• Details
• Contents