HCCJ. Absence of the court’s examination of the mutual obligations undertaken by the parties

The High Court of Cassation and Justice ruled that the termination of a synallagmatic convention founds itself not only on the principle of the obligatory force of the contract, but also on the very idea of the cause and simultaneity of the execution of the obligations arising from the said convention. In this regard, the High Court maintained that the formal enumeration of the conditions which are required by law for the resolution to operate, without a proper and effective analysis of the reciprocal obligations undertaken by the parties and the gravity of their non-fulfillment, cannot justify the solution given by the court to reject the action to terminate the purchase and sale promissory agreement introduced by the promissory-buyer. Ergo, in this situation, the provisions enclosed in Art. 304 pt. 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Art. 488 para. 1 pt. 6 of the New Code of Civil Procedure) are applicable. Even more, the motivation of the court of appeal is commensurate with an inadequate examination of the matter. (Decision no. 3893 of the 5th of December 2014, given at appeal by the 2nd Civil Division of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, covering the action to terminate a sale and purchase promissory agreement)

:: The Source: JURIDICE.ro

Andreea LUCACI

LinkedIn | Facebook