Aof the specific legal text on the basis of which the contracts were concluded until October they are subject to the regulation of common law the Civil Code of which obviously allowed the application the theory of unpredictability based on art. and art. . Given that Law no. represents an application of the theory of unpredictability at the level of the credit agreement its provisions are not retroactive paragraph . . Another criticism of unconstitutionality brought to Law no. concerns the violation of art. para. of the Constitution regarding equality before the law since according to the authors of the exception of.
Unconstitutionality in the situation of a competition of pursuit with other creditors Country Email List mortgagors or unsecured creditors if the debtor still has other assets free from encumbrances the law creates the preferential situation for other who have established a guarantee. By Decision no. of October the Court rejected this criticism showing that Financial institutions as creditors who have guaranteed their claims with mortgages on real estate are however in a different position from that of unsecured creditors considering the different nature of their claims see mutatis mutandis Decision no. of.
January published in the Official Gazette of Romania Part I no. of April paragraph . Therefore considering that even in this respect no grounds for a jurisprudential reversal can be retained the Court will reject the exception of unconstitutionality of the provisions of Law no. criticized from the perspective of art. para. of the Constitution. . With reference to the criticism of Law no. formulated from the perspective of art. of the Constitution the Court holds in addition to what emerges from the reasoning in Decision no. of October that the very text of art. of the Constitution stipulates that.
發表於 2023-12-27 18:41:41
