{"id":4927,"date":"2022-11-08T11:41:51","date_gmt":"2022-11-08T11:41:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.chirita-law.com\/?p=4927"},"modified":"2025-12-29T09:47:31","modified_gmt":"2025-12-29T07:47:31","slug":"cedo-valeanu-si-altii-c-romaniei-ineficienta-mecanismului-retrocedare","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/cedo-valeanu-si-altii-c-romaniei-ineficienta-mecanismului-retrocedare\/","title":{"rendered":"CEDO. V\u0103leanu \u015fi al\u0163ii c. Rom\u00e2niei. Ineficien\u0163a mecanismului de retrocedare a imobilelor preluate abuziv introdus prin Legea nr. 165\/2013."},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.echr.coe.int\/Pages\/home.aspx?p=home\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">CEDO<\/a> a pronun\u0163at \u00een data de 08.11.2022 hot\u0103r\u00e2rea \u00een cauza V\u0103leanu \u015fi al\u0163ii c. Rom\u00e2niei. Curtea a considerat c\u0103, de\u0219i a confirmat validitatea <a href=\"https:\/\/legislatie.just.ro\/Public\/DetaliiDocument\/147937\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Legii nr. 165\/2013<\/a> prin <a href=\"https:\/\/www.hotararicedo.ro\/index.php\/article_access\/view_article\/1149\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">hot\u0103r\u00e2rea pronun\u021bat\u0103 \u00een cauza Preda \u0219i al\u021bii c. Rom\u00e2niei<\/a>, mecanismul de restituire a bunurilor preluate abuziv pus \u00een aplicare de statul rom\u00e2n este totu\u0219i insuficient de opera\u021bional \u0219i de omogen, astfel \u00eenc\u00e2t a impus o sarcin\u0103 individual\u0103 excesiv\u0103 asupra reclaman\u021bilor.<\/p>\n<p>Reclaman\u021bii din spe\u0163\u0103 au ob\u021binut hot\u0103r\u00e2ri judec\u0103tore\u0219ti definitive \u00een favoarea lor prin care s-a dispus, dup\u0103 caz, eliberarea titlurilor de proprietate, punerea \u00een posesiea bunurilor lor sau s\u0103 li se pl\u0103teasc\u0103 desp\u0103gubiri. \u00cen ciuda acestor hot\u0103r\u00e2ri, niciunul dintre reclaman\u021bi nu a primit un titlu de proprietate sau nu a fost pus \u00een posesia propriet\u0103\u021bilor. Unii dintre reclaman\u0163i au sus\u021binut c\u0103 au fost insuficient compensa\u021bi. Al\u021bii au declarat c\u0103 cererile lor nu au primit niciun r\u0103spuns juridic, iar \u00een trei cereri reclaman\u021bii s-au pl\u00e2ns c\u0103 le-au fost anulate titlurile de proprietate.<\/p>\n<p>\u00cen ansamblu, Curtea a considerat c\u0103 din cauza neexecut\u0103rii \u00eendelungate a hot\u0103r\u00e2rilor judec\u0103tore\u0219ti \u00een favoarea reclaman\u021bilor, a lipsei unei c\u0103i de atac efective \u00een aceast\u0103 privin\u021b\u0103, a anul\u0103rii f\u0103r\u0103 desp\u0103gubiri a titlurilor de proprietate ale reclaman\u021bilor ca urmare a aplic\u0103rii incorecte de c\u0103tre stat a legii \u00een materie, precum \u0219i a neacord\u0103rii de c\u0103tre autorit\u0103\u021bi a unei desp\u0103gubiri rezonabile \u00een raport cu valoarea actual\u0103 a propriet\u0103\u021bii, mecanismul de restituire nu este suficient de opera\u021bional \u0219i de omogen pentru a nu impune o sarcin\u0103 excesiv\u0103 pentru reclaman\u021bi, \u00een pofida garan\u021biilor introduse de lege \u0219i validate anterior de Curte \u00een cauza Preda \u0219i al\u021bii c. Rom\u00e2niei.<\/p>\n<p>\u00cen consecin\u021b\u0103, Curtea a concluzionat c\u0103 a existat o \u00eenc\u0103lcare a art. 1 din Protocolul nr. 1 la <a href=\"https:\/\/www.echr.coe.int\/documents\/convention_ron.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Conven\u0163ie<\/a>. Prin aceea\u015fi hot\u0103r\u00e2re, statul rom\u00e2n a fost obligat s\u0103 ia m\u0103suri generale suplimentare pentru a rezolva problema structural\u0103 persistent\u0103 a mecanismului de restituire a propriet\u0103\u021bilor confiscate sau na\u021bionalizate de regimul comunist.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>avocat Bianca Pantea<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>CEDO a pronun\u0163at \u00een data de 08.11.2022 hot\u0103r\u00e2rea \u00een cauza V\u0103leanu \u015fi al\u0163ii c. Rom\u00e2niei. Curtea a considerat c\u0103, de\u0219i a confirmat validitatea Legii nr. 165\/2013 prin hot\u0103r\u00e2rea pronun\u021bat\u0103 \u00een cauza Preda \u0219i al\u021bii c. Rom\u00e2niei, mecanismul de restituire a bunurilor preluate abuziv pus \u00een aplicare de statul rom\u00e2n este totu\u0219i insuficient de opera\u021bional \u0219i [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[83],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4927","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-reprezentare-in-fata-cedo"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4927","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4927"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4927\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4927"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4927"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4927"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}