Perspectives of Law and Public Administration (Dec 2018)
APPLICABILITY OF LAW NO. 77/2016, IN RELATION TO THE RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ROMANIA IN THE SITUATION OF A FORCED EXECUTATION BEFORE THE ENTRY INTO FORCE OF THE LEGAL TEXT
Abstract
This paper seeks to establish a suitable working hypothesis for the situation mentioned in the title, referring to the fact that on many occasions the practice of the courts was not constant, leading to diametrically opposed solutions in similar cases, with very significant effects on the litigant parties. It is the case where some of the debtors, whose claim has been admitted by the court, all obligations arising from a bank loan contract subject to a forced execution having ceased, were no longer obliged to cover the difference between the principal debt due and the amount of money earned from the forced sale of the mortgaged property. On the other hand, other debtors, whose case regarding the extinction of the debt due to the forced execution of the mortgaged property, was dismissed, since the remission of the good was not voluntarily, and who were found in the situation where the forced execution was continued for the remaining debit after the distribution of the proceeds from the sale of the adjudged asset. The debt was usually employed penalizing interest and thus the forced execution proceedings continued until all outstanding amounts were extinguished. The analysis will follow the applicable law and jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Romania, the relevant doctrine and jurisprudence, in order to identify an appropriate solution to the problem of law.
