Prescripția dreptului de a obține executarea silită în cazul contractelor de credit

Abstract

Abstract

This case note examines a decision of the Bucharest Court of Appeal (5th civil division, no 980/2025) concerning the limitation period for enforcement of a mortgage credit agreement and the applicable intertemporal law. The Court held that the limitation of the right to obtain enforcement is a matter of substantive, not procedural, law, and that the applicable regime must therefore be determined under art 201 of Law No 71/2011 and art 6 para (4) of the new Romanian Civil Code. Since credit agreements concluded outside a jurisdictional procedure are enforceable titles for which the limitation period commences only from the date the claim becomes due, the Court found that the relevant starting point was the date of acceleration of the debt (24 January 2024) rather than the date of the last drawdown under the facility. Consequently, the three-year limitation period under art 706 para (1) of the new Romanian Code of Civil Procedure had not yet lapsed, and the first-instance finding of limitation was reversed. The note situates the decision within the ongoing doctrinal debate between the monist and dualist theories on the nature of the limitation period for enforcement and discusses its consistency with High Court of Cassation and Justice Decision No 13/2022.