Regarding the exception of unconstitutionality of

Roselin67

Ato the one in which the court resolves the appeal filed under art. of Law no. . . Bistrita Court The Civil Section appreciates in the opinion expressed in Court File no. .D that the exception of unconstitutionality of the provisions of art. paragraph art. art. art. and of art. of Law no. is unfounded without providing arguments in this regard. . the provisions of art. of Law no. the court considers that the constitutional provisions regarding the nonretroactivity of the law are violated. Because Law no. does not regulate either in contraventional matters or in criminal matters so that derogating from the provisions of art. para. of the.

Constitution violates them. . Since the provisions of art. of Law Country Email List no. respectively the rest of its provisions are not related to the litigation the court considers that the exception of unconstitutionality having such an object is inadmissible. . The Clrai Court appreciates in the opinion expressed in the Court File no. .D that the exception of unconstitutionality of the provisions of art. paragraph art. art. para. the final sentence and of art. of Law no. related to the provisions provided by art. para. from the Constitution and art. of the.



First Additional Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms with reference to art. of the Constitution is founded. According to the court the beneficiary of Law no. can be any consumer who has obtained a loan of up to euros appreciated value at the date of conclusion of the contract and who has guaranteed repayment of the loan with a residential building and has not suffered a criminal conviction in connection with the loan. However the justification offered in favor of the adoption.