THIRD SECTION

Application no . 54577/07 Dumitru DAVID against Romania and 7 other applications (see list appended)

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Did the applicants have a fair hearing in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention , and/or with Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention , in so far as the courts of appeal reached different final solutions in similar actions regarding the relevant mandatory contribution period for the recalculation of pensions of persons having retired under the provisions of Law 3/1977?

2. Was the principle of legal certainty, as developed in the Court ’ s case-law

regarding the interpretation of Article 6 of the Convention, complied with by the domestic courts?

The Government are requested to comment on the example of divergent domestic case-law, as submitted by the applicants. Are these examples similar to the applicants ’ circumstances and has there been a different interpretation of the applicable law?

APPENDIX

Case number and date of lodging

Applicant(s)

and/or representative

Final decisions recalculating the applicants ’ pension, applying a 30-year mandatory period

Diverging case-law cited by the applicants: final decisions applying a 20-year mandatory contribution period

54577/07

Lodged on 26/11/2007

Dumitru DAVID

C luj Court of Appeal decision no 1364/R/2007 of 12 June 2007, file no 4409/100/2006

TimiÅŸ oara Court of Appeal decisions no 4040/R of 7 December 2005 and no 2086 of 31 October 2006

43636/06

lodged on 19/10/2006

Io a n MIHALACHE

Alba Iu lia Court of Appeal decision no 771/2006 of 8 June 2006, file no 97/57/2006

Timi ÅŸ oara Court of Appeal decision no 4040/Rof 7 December 2005

48039/09

lodged on 8/09/2009

Constantin DUBINTOV

PiteÅŸ ti Court of Appeal, decision no 375/R-CA of 2 March 2009 (available on 1 April 2009), file no 1756/109/2008

Pite ÅŸ ti Court of Appeal decisions no 110/R ‑ CA of 3 October 2007 and no 562/R-CA of 23 March 2009

52596/09

lodged on 23/09/2009

Ion NICOLESCU

PloieÅŸ ti Court of Appeal, decision no 755 of 14 April 2009, file no 5960/120/2008

Bucharest Court of Appeal, decisions no 3988R of 17 October 2008, no 4805R of 28 November 2008, and no 4859/R of 3 December 2008;

PloieÅŸ ti Court of Appeal, decision no 492 of 16 March 2009

63469/10

lodged on 18/10/2010

Corneliu IOAN and Others ( Arghir Porca , Ilie Marica , Marin Sfantu )

Represented by Vasile Barbu

BraÅŸ ov Court of Appeal , decision no 768/R of 6 July 2010 (file no 9162/62/2009), and nos 716/R, 707/R and 708/R of 29 June 2010 (files nos 80/62/2010, 114/62/2010 and 7875/62/2009 respectively)

BraÅŸ ov Court of Appeal, decis ions nos 1047/R and 1036/R of 5 October 2010

10666/11

lodged on 4/02/2011

Paul DUMITRESCU

Craiova Court of Appeal, decision no 5776 of 19 November 2010, file no 788/104/2010

Bucharest Court Of Appeal, decisions no 5423/R of 7 October 2009, no 5868/R of 22 October 2009 and no 6967R of 27 November 2009;

Constanţ a Court of Appeal, decision no 312/AS of 21 April 2009

13178/11

lodged on 14/02/2011

Constantin MECHE

Craiova Court of Appeal, decision no 5038 of 15 October 2010, file no 793/104/2010

Bucharest Court Of Appeal, decisions no 5423/R of 7 October 2009, no 5868/R of 22 October 2009 and no 6967R of 27 November 2009

20219/11

lodged on 12/03/2011

Augustin CALUGAR

Cluj Court of Appeal, decision no 2417/R of 6 October 2010, file no 4525/117/2009

Bucharest Court of Appeal, decisions no 1528/P of 11 March 2009, no 1895 of 25 March 2009, and no 4596R of 19 June 2009; Gala ţ i Court of Appeal, decision no 470/R of 5 May 2009; Constanţ a Court of Appeal, decision no 77/AS of 2 March 2010