Post by account_disabled on Dec 27, 2023 21:58:07 GMT -5
Abeing resolved according to the records of the High Court of Cassation and Justice consulted on April . IV. The point of view of the panel of judges regarding the resolution of the legal issue . The panel charged with resolving the appeal in File no. of the Braov Court of Appeal the Administrative and Fiscal Litigation Section showed that the presentation of the point of view would be equivalent to a prepronouncement given that the interpretation proposed by the appellantdefendant corresponds to the grounds of appeal and the interpretation proposed by the respondentclaimant coincides with the reasoning of the appealed sentence. V.
The parties point of view regarding the resolution of the question Country Email List of law . The appellantdefendant the Local Council of Sfntu Gheorghe Municipality filed on February a request for referral to the High Court of Cassation and Justice based on the provisions of art. of the Code of Civil Procedure in order to issue a preliminary decision to resolve the pending legal issue. In the content of the request the appellantdefendant formulated claims similar to the grounds of appeal which were reproduced previously. . The respondentplaintiff the prefect of.
Covasna county submitted on left the request for referral to the High Court of Cassation and Justice to the discretion of the court and regarding the question of law formulated claims similar to the considerations set forth in the appealed sentence. . After the communication of the report none of the parties complied with the obligation imposed by the provisions of art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure regarding the submission in writing of a point of view. VI. The jurisprudence of national courts in the matter . Jurisprudence of the Braov Court of Appeal The referring court attached to the notification Decision no. of October pronounced by a panel of the Administrative and Fiscal Litigation.
The parties point of view regarding the resolution of the question Country Email List of law . The appellantdefendant the Local Council of Sfntu Gheorghe Municipality filed on February a request for referral to the High Court of Cassation and Justice based on the provisions of art. of the Code of Civil Procedure in order to issue a preliminary decision to resolve the pending legal issue. In the content of the request the appellantdefendant formulated claims similar to the grounds of appeal which were reproduced previously. . The respondentplaintiff the prefect of.
Covasna county submitted on left the request for referral to the High Court of Cassation and Justice to the discretion of the court and regarding the question of law formulated claims similar to the considerations set forth in the appealed sentence. . After the communication of the report none of the parties complied with the obligation imposed by the provisions of art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure regarding the submission in writing of a point of view. VI. The jurisprudence of national courts in the matter . Jurisprudence of the Braov Court of Appeal The referring court attached to the notification Decision no. of October pronounced by a panel of the Administrative and Fiscal Litigation.