The High Court of Cassation and Justice has held that whereas, by introductory application, the defendant company was forced to pay certain amounts of money, as well as to partially cancel an assignment agreement, in a correct manner the court, based on article 36 from Law no. 85/2006, decided to suspend only the request regarding the payment of certain amounts of money, whereas such a request aims to achieve a receivable against the insolvent debtor, unlike the request regarding the partial cancellation of the assignment agreement which cannot lead directly to the achievement of the receivable.
In this case, the High Court also held that, since the suspension of judgment did not concern the whole action brought against the insolvent defendant, it is natural the reference in the decision of the court to reject (partially) the action against the defendant, and the lack of any express provision on the rejected part of the request does not trigger the annulment of the decision. (Decision no. 524 of 17 February 2015 rendered in the recourse of Civil Section II of the High Court of Cassation and Justice covering claims and cancellation of the assignment of receivable agreement).
:: The Source: JURIDICE.ro
Adina Elena OPREA