The High Court of Cassation and Justice ruled that “the reparations inflicted after the judgment of first instance”, of which the fourth thesis of Art. 294 para. (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure talks, are those reparations asked for in the court proceeding, but, given their successive nature, they continue to flow even after the judgment of first instance. In this case, the plaintiff has asked, by means of the statement of claims, for the reparation of the material and moral damages of which he suffered following his accidental infection with staphylococcus aureus during the time he was treated at a hospital unit. He considered the reparation to be possible, in relation to his health at that particular time, by granting some global, determined sums of money. The High Court maintained that the statement of claims did not aim at reparations which, in light of their successive nature, would have continued to flow even after the judgment of first instance. Thus, the claim from appeal to increase these reparations cannot be qualified other than a new claim, inadmissible in the appeal proceedings, regardless of the fact that this increase would justifiably be a consequence of the re-assessment of the moral prejudices that have been mentioned in the introductory action, or as a consequence of the sufferings caused by the new medical proceedings at which the claimant was to be subjected.
:: The Source: JURIDICE.ro