Contravention complaint. Failure to bring the parties involved in the accident and the insurance company into the case if there has been a traffic accident. Legal basis on which the judgment may be set aside

JURISPRUDENȚĂ COMENTATĂ ȘI ADNOTATĂ

Abstract

Art. 119 of O.U.G. no. 195/2002 and Art. 33 para. (2) of G.O. no. 2/2001 establish the obligation for the court in charge of a traffic violation complaint, following the commission of an act resulting in a traffic accident, to summon, in addition to the plaintiff, the institution to which the investigating officer belongs, as well as the persons involved in the accident, and the insurance companies of the vehicles involved in the road accident. (...)

The Court finds that the provisions of Article 480 para. (3) of the Civil Procedure Code. However, the court will not hear the case, evoking the merits, but will refer the case for retrial to the first instance, although this was not expressly requested by any of the parties, the appellant petitioner leaving it to the discretion of the court to decide on the ground of public policy raised ex officio under Article 479 Civil Procedure Code.

The Court therefore holds that the relevant provisions of Article 480 (3), second sentence, of the Civil Procedure Code, since the persons who were not summoned to the trial before the first instance court do not appear in the operative part of the civil judgment under appeal, so that they could not be parties to the appeal, by reference to the procedural framework erroneously established by the first instance court, which, however, is also binding on the court of appeal under Article 478 para. (1) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Consequently, it is held that those persons did not have the legal possibility of expressly requesting that this measure be taken to set aside the judgment of the first instance, with the consequence that the case be remitted for retrial, so that, in order not to be deprived of a degree of jurisdiction, the court, having regard also to the procedural position of the appellant-petitioner, will uphold this interpretation of the provisions of Article 480 para. (3), second sentence, of the Civil Procedure Code.