High Court of Justice and Cassation decided that, even if the judicial nature of the incidental demand is for defense, the third part does not become a simple defendant of the part in favor of whom he has intervened because he must proved his own interest and actual participation in legitimate court process. The High Court stated the interest is legitimate when seeking affirmation or realization of a subjective right recognized by law, or to an interest protected by law and according to economic and social purpose for which it was recognized. In this case, the High Court admitted that the first instances decision which in this litigation having as object nullity capital increase operation, rejected in principle to intervene filed by the Association of Anti-Corruption accessory, holding that the intervener has not justified interest, legitimate current practice of intervening in the process. (Decision no. 1801 from 29th of March 2012 pronounced in appeal by the Civil II Section of the High Court of Justice and Cassation having as object nullity social capital increase operation ).
>> The source: JURIDICE.ro