The judges from the High Court of Cassation and Justice appreciated (in the Decision no. 442 from 2nd February 2011 pronounced in appeal at the Trade Section from the HCCJ which had as object the annulment of a supply and refund contract for mobile goods) that the annulment is a sentence for the non-execution of the bilateral contract with successive execution, consisting in its suppression for the future and taking back the parties to the situation before the moment when the contract was signed, the annulment making the consequences of the contract to be suspended for the future. For this case, the application of the restore to the previous situation principle (restitution in integrum) states that all what was executed in name of a legal suppressed act must be restored, and in this case the parties of the legal report have to go back to the previous situation and considering the act was never signed. In this case, the High Court noticed the appeal court infringed the principle of restore to the previous situation when appreciated that it the restitution of the goods without administrating the convincing evidences, from which the handing, the giving and the identified data come out, is not possible, because from the written stipulations that the parties added to the contract, it is obvious that these goods are the purveyour properties and their restitution is, without doubt, possible. As a consequence, the High Court admitted the claimant’s appeal, modifying the decision by admitting the demanding for the goods’ restitution.
>> The source