The judges from the HCCJ appreciated (in the Decision no. 768 from 9th February 2011 rendered on appeal by the Department of administrative and fiscal from the HCCJ) which had as object the suspension of the execution of some orders made by the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development), that due to the provisions of the article 14 from the bill of administration no 554/2004, in well justified cases and to prevent an imminent damage, the victim can ask the specified court for the suspension of the unilateral administrative document execution till the first instance gives a verdict. Analysing the fact, the Supreme Court appreciated that the first condition related to the existence of a well documented case can be taken into consideration only if from the cause circumstances would result a powerful and obvious doubt about the administrative documents legacy. About the second condition, the imminent damage the High Court specified that the simple testimony of the claimant about the violation of the bill no. 188/1999 provisions, without proves to complete his testimony is not sufficient to find out the execution of this task.
>> The source