The High Court of Cassation and Justice has ruled that the irrevocability of the unilateral judicial act is a consequence of the principle of the obligatory force of the judicial act generally and it requires for the unilateral act not to be concluded upon by means of will manifestation on behalf of its author, on the contrary. Examining the unilateral act of the renunciation from the perspective of its irrevocable nature, the High Court stated that the fundamental of this principle consists in, as it is the case of the bilateral judicial act, the necessity to respect the rights of third parties and the created judicial situations as well, aiming to assure the safety of the civil circuit. By means of exception to this rule, the repeal of the unilateral judicial act is allowed if it brings no prejudice to the rights or legitimate interests of the good faith third parties. In the present case, after the appealed decision has been taken, the plaintiff who became defendant at appeal has given declarations which were sealed by notary, in the light of which he renounced at the claims. Then, at appeal, he has attached some other different statements which were probated as well and through which he showed the understanding of the need to revoke the previous declarations, on account of them being made following the parties agreeing upon not appealing, and the recurrent defendant did not respect this deal. The High Court stated that, by way of the expressed settlement and the effects caused by the initial authentic declarations, all the rights of the plaintiff which set up the basis of the writ of summons have terminated, so that the High Court has modified the appealed decision, that is to annul the court’s judgment and the dismissal of the writ of summons lacing in substance.
(Decision no. 2104 of the 10th of June 2014 taken at appeal by Civil Section II of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, covering the rendering of a judgment which is to take the place of a buy-sell agreement)
:: The source: JURIDICE.ro