Course 4 Legal Act

www.ovigroup.ro www.ovidiuioandumitru.ro

CIVIL LEGAL ACT

The most accurate definition of a civil juridical act is an expression of

somebody's will made with the intention to bear, modify or cease a juridical

relationship.

Our law commonly uses this notion (act) with two different meanings:

1) Firstly, as we already defined it, as an expression of a person's will.

This is the negotium sense;

2) Secondly, this notion is used with the meaning of a written statement,

which is known as the instrumentum sense.

Civil code uses both of these meanings. For instance, Art.689 civ.c.

provides that "the acceptance of a succession can be expressed or implied". It is

expressed whenever the successor makes an act in an authentic form

(instrumentum sense) in order to acquire the inheritance, and it is implied

whenever he simply makes an act (negotium sense) which can be concluded

only by a person who has a successor quality.

CLASSIFICA TION OF JURIDICAL ACTS

There are different criteria to classify the civil acts as follows:

Unilateral and bilateral acts

A unilateral act is an act that involves the expression of a single person's

will. It means that, there is only one person expressing his intention to produce

juridical effects. It can be included in this category the will, the offer to contract,

the acceptance of a succession.


On the contrary, a bilateral or multilateral act is an agreement between

two or more parties with distinguished interests. A bilateral/multilateral act is a

contract, a legally recognized promise or bargains made by two or more persons

and including all rights and duties resulting from their promises or bargains.

Examples of contracts include: contract of sale, contract of exchange, loan,

mandate, consignment, employment contract, etc.

The process by which the parties arrive at a bargain will vary widely

according to the circumstances. It is common to assume that it involves two

distinct steps: the first is an offer by one party and the second is an acceptance

by the other.

Moreover, contracts may be classified, in their turn, as unilateral. and

bilateral contracts.

Indeed, a contract may involve an exchange of promises in which two

parties agree that each of them will perform a certain obligation. The exchange of

a promise for a promise is known as a bilateral contract.

If there is no such exchange and only one part assumes obligations, the

contract is unilateral. For instance, in a loan contract, the loaner is the promisor,

being entitled to demand the loan, and the borrower is the promisee, being

obliged to give it back. We emphasize that, in this case, the contract involves two

will but only one part assumes obligations.

Acts made by onerous title and acts made by gratuitous title

The criterion of this distinction is the aim pursued by parties concluding

the act. An act made by onerous title is that act in which each party promises an

economic benefit to the other in exchange of another economic benefit. On the

contrary, an act made by gratuitous title is one in which one party promises to the

other an economic benefit without expecting, in exchange, any promise.

Although many of the unilateral contracts are made by gratuitous title

(e.g., the donation or the gratuitous mandate), there are some which may have

both gratuitous or onerous titles (e.g., the loan contract without or with interests).


The acts made by onerous title subdivide into commutative and aleatory

acts. A commutative act is one in which the parties know, from the very moment

of concluding the act, which will be their mutual obligations (e.g., sale contract).

On the other hand, an aleatory act is an agreement wherein the performance of

one party depends on the occurrence of an uncertain event (alea).

In fact, when the contract is concluded the parties do not know the extent

of their obligations because their performance depends of the occurrence of an

uncertain and fortuitous event. Examples of such acts include life and fire

insurance contracts or life annuity contracts. Such agreements are enforceable

notwithstanding an uncertainty of terms at the time of their conclusion or an

undertaken risk clearly appears.

The acts made by gratuitous title are subdivided, in their turn, into grants

and acts of benevolence. A grant is a voluntary transfer of goods from a

patrimony to another. This transfer can be achieved either by a person to

another.

An act of benevolence is a favor made by a person to another without

decreasing the patrimony of the former (e.g., the gratuitous mandate).

Translative, constitutive and declarative act

The criterion of this classification is the effect of the act. Firstly, a

constitutive act is one that constitutes a right which does not previously exist. For

instance, the juridical institutions of mortgage or of usufruct are such constitutive

acs.

Secondly, a translative act is an act which transfers a pre-existing right.

The most juridical acts have this character (e.g., sale contract or exchange

contract).

Finally, a declarative act is one that consolidates a pre-existing subjective

right. For instance, the partition or the settlement are declarative acts. A

“partition" is a dissolution of the unity of a possession that exists between mutual

owners.


Consensual, formal and real acts

A consensual act is an enforceable one with no formal conditions

requested. In our law, the rule is that the acts are concluded by parties' simple

.consent. Indeed, according to Art.969 civ.c. the most juridical acts are

enforceable by simple consent.

On the contrary, a formal act is enforceable only if there are observed

some additional formal conditions, other than the simple consent. The form

required for concluding such acts is, most frequently, a written settlement. For

instance, law requires a written form, and sometimes even an authentic form, for

concluding acts as donation, will, mortgage or farm contract.

A real act is one that can be concluded only by delivering the thing by the

transferor to the transferee. Therefore, the deliverance of the goods is requested

not only to perform the real act, but to conclude it as well. There are real acts

loan or deposit contracts, whereby the simple consent is not enough for the

validity of the transaction. Thus, the deliverance of the goods is required by law

for a valid conclusion of the act itself.

It should be mentioned that, the "delivery" is a voluntary transfer of title or

possession from one party to another, a legally recognized handing over of one's

possessory rights to another. When actual delivery is very cumbersome or

impossible, law finds a constructive delivery sufficient as regards the transfer of

the title. Thus, one may deliver the contents of a safety deposit box by handing

over to another the key thereto together with any necessary authorization. Such

action is the so-called "symbolic delivery".


Acts with instantaneous execution and acts with successive execution

An act with an instantaneous execution (uno ictu) is one that involves a

single performance, meaning made at once (e.g., sale contract). Whereas an act

with successive execution involves multiple performance. It means that it is made

turns and turns about (e.g., life annuity contract, rent contract, etc.).

There are many differences between these categories of acts, but the

most important one is that the nullity of an act with an instantaneous execution

retroacts. It means that it goes into effect for the future (ex tunc) and for the past

(ex nunc) as well. By contrary, the nullity of an act with successive execution

operates to terminate the contract from that point forward and does not affect the

former validity of the contract.

Principal and accessory acts

A principal act is one independent of any other act, i.e., an act with

selfsufficient existence.

By contrary, an accessory act is one that depends on a principal act. For

instance, a mortgage depends on the loan contracted by the mortgagor. It cannot

continue after the time when the mortgagor performed his obligation to the

benefit of the encumbrancer. In this case, the rule is that the accessory act has

the same destiny as the principal one (accesorium sequitur principale).

Pure and simple acts and acts affected by modalities

A pure and simple act is one that does not contain a modality. There are

several acts that are incompatible with modalities, like marriage or adoption, but

most of them may be affected by the modalities.

A "modality" is' a future event that determines the existence or

performance of a juridical act. There are modalities the term, the condition and

the task, which will be later treated in this chapter. Certain acts are essentially

dependent upon a modality, e.g., the loan, that always involves a term, the

donation with a task or the insurance contract.


Inter vivos acts and mortis causa acts

An inter vivos act (lifetime act) is that which produces its effects

unconditioned until the death of the promisor. That category includes all contracts

and the most of unilateral" acts.

A mortis causa act is one which produces its effects after the death of the

promisor. In other words, until then it has no effects. This is the case of the will,

whereby the person bequeaths during his life about his assets:

Named acts and unnamed acts

The named acts are the acts described and regulated by law. Their

conclusion and performance will be governed by the specific provision of law

(e.g., civil code regulates the sale contract in Art. 1294 - 1404, the donation in

Art. 813 - 840, the exchange contract in Art. 1405 -1409, etc.).

On the contrary, the unnamed acts are those created by the parties for

their specific interests. They are as legal as the named ones. Inasmuch as there

is not a specific provision in law, they are governed by the rules determined

according to the general principles of contract law. Sometimes an unnamed

contract may become a named one, when a special law, which describes and

regulates it, comes into force. It has happened recently with the sponsorship

contract, becoming a named act by coming into force of Law no. 32/1994.


CONDITIONS OF VALIDITY

By conditions of validity of juridical acts we understand their elements of

enforceability. Thus, Art.948 civ.c., provides the main conditions for the validity of

juridical acts. These conditions are the following:

- the capacity of the parties to contract;

- a genuine assent of the promisor;

- a certain subject matter;

- a lawful consideration.

However, this legal provision has been criticized, on the ground of

vagueness and incompleteness. Thus, these conditions are really requested not

only for bilateral acts (contracts), but also for unilateral ones. Secondly, the

assent has to be genuine from both parties, the promisor and the promisee,

because it is unacceptable to enforce a contract despite the will of one of them.

Thirdly, the form is not included in the condition of validity, even if it is a

condition upon which the very existence of the act may depends.

Therefore, the juridical doctrine considers as conditions of validity of

juridical acts:

- the legal capacity of parties;

- the genuine assent of parties;

- the lawful subject matter;

- the lawful consideration;

- the proper legal form.

From a theoretic point of view, these conditions could be classified into: -

conditions of substance of the act (the capacity, the assent, the subject matter

and the consideration), and - conditions of form of the act.


The capacity

To test the capacity of concluding a juridical act does not mean to see

whether a person's mind is impaired or unsound, and whether that person

understands all the terms of the act, but, it means, to see whether that person

has the ability to comprehend the nature of the transaction he or she is engaged

in and understand its consequences.

Essentially, any person unable to take care of his or her property for any

reason, including mental illness, advanced age, or disease is considered

incompetent. The capacity, which is a state of law (de jure) is distinguishable

from judgment, which is a state of fact (de facto).

Civil code provides, in Art. 949, that "any person is assumed to be able to

contract unless he is declared incapable by law". It means that without a court

determination of legal incompetence, the presumption of law is that a person has

the legal capacity to contract or to make a unilateral act. In this matter, the rule is

the capacity, and the lack of capacity is the exception. Therefore, any legal

provisions related to the absence of capacity cannot be extensively construed.

In company law, the issue is analyzed according to the rule provided by Decree

no. 31/1954, which prohibits in Art. 34 the ultra vires acts (meaning, the activities

of a corporation beyond the powers conferred upon it by its charter, or by the

statute under which it was created).


The assent

The assent and the consideration constitute the juridical will of the parties.

The parties voluntarily and knowingly conclude the act as a result of their

intention. In our legal system, the juridical will of parties is governed by two

principles:

- The principle of freedom of juridical will of the parties. It means that the

parties of a civil act are free to conclude or not a certain act, to stipulate any

particular clauses, to determine the specific content of the act, and, in most

cases, to determine the form of the act. The parties' freedom to conclude any

juridical acts is limited by the compulsory rules of law and by the public policy.

- The principle of real will of the parties. According to this principle, if there

is any incongruence between the real intent of the parties and the expressed

clauses of the act, the former is the one which will be taken into account.

It should be mentioned that, in order to apply this principle, the proof of the real

intention of the parties is taken into account. Thus, if it is possible to determine

the real will of the parties, the act has to be construed upon the expressed words

used by parties.

It results there from that the validity of the act depends on the validity of

the juridical will of the parties. Indeed, in some cases, the elements required for a

valid and enforceable contract appear to be present but in reality they are not.

For example, if a store owner accepts a gang leader's offer to protect his property

from gang violence by agreeing to pay the gang $100 per month, the store owner

is not genuinely assenting to the terms of the act. Similarly, if a used-car

salesperson deceitfully states that a car has a rebuilt engine and has never been

in an accident, the buyer who relies on that information and signs a purchase

contract does not have a valid juridical will to conclude the act.

The assent externalizes the party's intent to conclude a juridical act. For

being the basis of a valid act, the assent has to fulfill several conditions, as

follows:


*) It has to .exist. Any act concluded in the absence of the assent will be declared

null and void;

*) It has to be unambiguously externalized. It means to result from the words of

the parties, either orally or written expressed, or even derived from their actions.

While, usually, any reasonable means of communication are effective to

externalize a valid assent, several problems arise in case of silence. Does

silence have any juridical value?

Generally speaking, the assent cannot be implied, and in case of silence it

is considered that it is no assent. Mere inaction and silence are usually not I

regarded as manifestations of intention to agree over a contract. However, some

exceptions to this rule occur, depending on the subject matter of the act.

Firstly, law expressly provides, in some cases, that the silence of one of

the parties has to be considered an assent. For instance, Art.1437 civ.c

stipulates that the rent contract is considered restored in force if, after the term of

the contract has been fulfilled, the parties silently continue to perform it.

Secondly, the initial agreement between the parties may constitute the

basis for regarding silence as an assent.

Thirdly, certain conducts of the party may be assumed as expressing an

assent. For instance, if an heir conducts himself like an acceptant of an

inheritance, law considers that he has performed a tacit acceptance.

*) It has to be expressed by a person who is mentally competent to

conclude the act. In other words, the person is able to comprehend the nature of

the transaction he or she is engaged in and to understand its consequences.

*) It has to be expressed by a person who intents to engage himself in a

legal relationship.

*) It has to be definite and certain as the essential terms of the act are

concerned;

*) It has to be genuine. To be genuine, the assent must be conceded

voluntarily and knowingly by each of the parties, elsewhere there is no valid

contract between them.


The lack of genuine assent may arise by the so-called "vices of consent"

or defects. Law considers as vices of consent the following:

a) the mistake/error;

b) the fraud;

c) the duress;

d) the injury.

a) The mistake (error) The error is generally defined as a state of mind which has not

accordance with the facts. It is an erroneous belief about the facts as they exist

at the time when the agreement is concluded. It should be mentioned that the

error is produced by the person himself. In order to vitiate the party's assent, the

error should be serious. In that case, the party is entitled to claim the cancellation

of the act.

There are three sorts of errors affecting the enforceability of the act:

*) fundamental error, which refers to the nature of the act (error in

negotium) or to the identity of the subject matter (error in corpore). For instance,

when one of the parties believes that the act is a donation, and the other one

believes that it is a sale. In this case, there is more than a lack of genuine assent,

there is no assent at all.

A similar case is when one party believes that he or she buys a car while

the other party believes that he or she sells a toy car. Therefore, the act is not

only avoidable, but it is null and void;

*) excusable error, which refers to the qualities of the subject matter of the

act (error in substantiam) or to the contracting person (error in personam). A

case of error in substantiam arises, for example, when the seller believes that the

subject matter of the contract is an upright piano, and the buyer believes that it is

a grand piano. This contract may be avoided on the ground of lack of genuine

assent.


Another type of error is one concerning a person's identity. Thus,

generally, an act is avoidable for error in personam only if it is concluded intuitu

personae. These acts are concluded on the ground of one of the parties' qualities

If the offer or receives an acceptance from one whom he mistakenly

believes to be the addressee of the offer, the offeror may avoid the contract for

error in personam.

*) immaterial error, which refers to an contract. It doesn't confer to any of

the parties unenforceable.

From another point of view, an error could be bilateral or unilateral. A

mutual (bilateral) error means that both parties are misunderstood the same

matter. For example, a mutual error is where both parties understood that the

real agreement was what one party alleges it to be, but had unintentionally

prepared and executed one which did not express the true agreement.

A future distinction should be drawn up between an error about law and an

error about the facts. It should be mentioned that within our system of law, the

error about law is not accepted for pleading somebody's ignorance. This rule is

based on the fact that law is presumed to be known from the moment it is

published in the Official Monitor of Romania.

Thus, whenever somebody is fully cognizant of the facts and the

substance of his behavior, he cannot plead his ignorance regarding the legal

consequences of his conduct for justifying the rescission of the contract. By

contrary, in case of errors about the facts the party can claim the rescission of

the contract.

b) The fraud The fraud is the misrepresentation of a fact that is made with knowledge

and with intention to deceive the other party.

The fraud has the same essence as the error/mistake, meaning the

misrepresentation. But unlike the error/mistake, the fraud results from one .

contracting party action. Thus, the party who misrepresents the facts clearly

intends to do it and to deceive the second party, who, relying on the

misrepresentations, changes his or her legal position in concluding the contract.


Sometimes, a misrepresentation of facts may be unintentional. It means

that there is no fraud, but the act is still avoidable, because it was concluded by

mistake.

In order to have a misrepresentation, law commonly requires either an

affirmative act or an express statement. Occasionally, silence may constitute a

misrepresentation of facts leading to fraud. The intention to deceive is expressed

by the party's intention to create a false impression. Since fraud requires this

intent, mere negligence or carelessness cannot constitute fraud.

From a structural point of view, the fraud has two main elements the

intentional one (which consists of the will to fraud the other party), and the

material one (which consists of the activities performed in order to lead the other

party into mistake).

Generally, mere failure to disclose information to the other party does not

constitute a fraud, because law does not impose a duty of disclosure.

There are, however, a number of exceptions to this rule. Suppose one

party knows certain material facts and knows the other party is not aware of

them.

Moreover, he also knows that if those facts were known by the other party

there would be no contract. For example, when a prospective seller of land has

knowledge of a hidden defects in the property that cannot be observed through

inspection. If the seller fails to inform the purchaser about these defects, the

seller could be held liable for fraud because his or her silence was intended to

mislead the purchaser into assuming there were no defects.

However, an active ceasing of the fact is the most obvious type of

misrepresentation. For instance, when the seller of a used car turns back the

odometer to conceal the number of kilometers the car has been driven, fraud has

occurred. Similarly, in order to be employed in a better position, one of the

parties forgets certain deeds, pretending that he has more qualifications that he

or she really has. Thus, this kind of employment contract would be avoidable for

lack of genuine assent. Of course, an express statement of fact that is a lie also

constitutes fraud.


c) The duress

The relief from an agreement on the grounds of duress is clearly avoidable

if a person is deprived of his freedom or his property through physical or moral

force. Even the threat of physical force, although not carried out, constitutes

duress.

It should be mentioned that duress is not limited to the above situations.

Indeed, undue influence, which exists when a person exercises mental

coercion over another, can also lead to lack of genuine assent.

Furthermore, the coercion exercised not only against the contractual party,

but against a relative or closed friend of the party as well constitutes duress, in a

juridical meaning.

The essence of duress is the lack of free will or voluntary assent. Any

wrongful act or threat that overcomes the free will of the consenting party

constitutes duress. In other words, any economic coercion, threats on a person's

family and the beloved ones, and other uses of moral or social force to put a

person in such fear that his or her act is not voluntary, constitutes duress.

In order to determine whether a contract can be avoided on account of

duress, it is necessary to ascertain whether the acts or the threats were wrongful

and whether these events and not the free will of the party have induced the

required contractual assent.

At the same time, it should be mentioned that duress cannot be limited to

the fear that might overcome an ordinary person. If a contracting party, whether

brave or timid, is actually coerced to conclude a contract, duress has occurred.

Thus the state of mind of the person who is being threatened must be examined.

Did one party voluntarily accept the terms of the contract? Were the

circumstances such that there was no predictable alternative? Were those

circumstances due to coercive acts the other party? If the answer is affirmative,

the act is avoidable for duress.

Unlike fraud, duress can arise not only from the activity of the contracting

party, but also from the wrongful activity of a third party.


As a conclusion, it should be mentioned that, as a vice, duress

presupposes an intentional element and a material one as well. Thus, the

intentional element is the fear induced to a contracting party for determining he or

she to conclude a juridical act. The exactly means used to induce that fear

represent the material element of duress. In fact, the induced fear is the element,

which vitiates the party's assent.

d) Injury Injury represents an obvious disproportion between mutual promises of

the parties within a bilateral contract.

In fact, injury is not provided by civil code as a real vice of consent, but it is

commonly recognized that it has this effect.

Injury includes the absence of the meaningful choice of one party together

with the terms of the contract, which are unreasonably favorable to the other

party.

It should be mentioned that not every juridical act could be avoided on the

ground of injury. Law requires several conditions that have to be fulfilled to obtain

the rescission of the act based on injury. Thus:

*) it has to be a bilateral act (e.g. a contract). That condition is imposed by

the fact that only these kind of juridical acts are defined as promises made in

exchange of promises. As consequences, bilateral contracts are susceptible of

disproportion of parties' mutual promises;

*) It has to be a commutative contract, otherwise the disproportion

assumed by the parties appears as a normal risk of an aleatory contract (the

terms "commutative" and "aleatory" contracts are explained in another chapter of

this book); .

*) the party who alleges to avoid the contract has to be an underage

person between 14 and 18 years old. According to Romanian law, this category

of persons can claim the cancellation of the contract on the grounds of injury;

*) it has to be a contract whereby such minor can conclude on his own

name and without any additional consent.


The subject matter

The parties' conduct, established by juridical act in order to perform it,

constitutes the object of the act.

Therefore, the object of the act or its subject matter is the action or the

non-action that the active subject has the right to require, and the passive subject

ought to perform.

It appears that the subject matter of the act is identically with the object of

the juridical relationship, which creates that act. Moreover, the object and the

content of the juridical act are bound together with the same correlation that the

object and the content of juridical relationship. It results that, the actions or the

actions that the active party can pretend and the passive party is liable to perform

expresses their subjective rights and obligations arising from the act concluded

between them.

Within a juridical act, the parties' conduct can refer to goods and thus, the

toads become subsequent objects of the act.

In order to be valid, the subject matter of a juridical act has to fulfill seven

different conditions requested by law, as follows:

1. The subject matter has to exist. Law considers the subject matter as

existing even if it exists in the near future, unless it does not have an actual

existence (e.g., the sale of future harvest is a valid contract). A transaction in

futures occurs when a person contracts to deliver goods that either does not

exist, or the seller does not own them at the time of contracting. There is only

one exception from this rule. It is the case of the sale of future inheritance, which

is completely prohibited by law, not on the ground of non-existence of the subject

matter, but on the ground of immoral consideration.

If the object does no longer exist (at present), even if it has existed in the

past, the subject matter does not fulfill this requirement.

2. The subject matter has to belong to the civil circuit. Thus, according to

Art.963 civ.c. "only the goods on the market can be the object of a contract".


3. The subject matter has to be identified or identifiable. The process of

selecting or setting aside the specific goods is referred to as identification of the

goods within the contract. According to Art. 964 civ.c., the goods individual

established (res ceria) are identified by their features, while general established

goods (res genera) are identified by their quantity, quality, number, size, etc.

The identification of goods has important legal consequences for the

contracting parties. Thus, if the goods are individual established and are lost,

damaged, or destroyed, the seller supports these risks. By contrary, when the

goods are general established, the seller is bound to deliver goods from the

same category, unless the risk has passed to the buyer. In this last case, the

buyer bears the loss.

It should be mentioned that the act is null, unless its object/subsequent

subject matter is identified or, at least, identifiable.

4. The subject matter has to be legal or material possible (impossibilium

nulla obligatio est). The impossibility of the subject matter means the impossibility

of anyone to perform a particular promise. For example, is not material possible

to alienate the moon. It is neither legal possible to sell goods that belong to public

property of the state.

This requirement is not considered fulfilled if the performance of the

contract is impossible only for a particular promisor, but it is generally possible.

For instance, a contract whereby a part promises to the other to pay an

amount of

5. The subject matter has to be free from legal or moral prohibition. It

means that the subject matter of the act should be lawful. Law usually cannot

enforce an act whereby the parties promise to do something illegal or against

public policy or morals.

6. Each party has to assume his or her owns behavior. It means that

nobody can promise somebody else's conduct. For example, it is forbidden to sell

the goods which belong to somebody else, or to engage performance the

performance of somebody else.


The consideration

In order to be enforceable, a legal consideration or cause must support a

juridical act. The consideration represents the goal pursued by the parties who

conclude a particular juridical act.

The consideration is analyzed by our juridical literature from two points of

view:

- the instant consideration, which is essentially the same in all acts of a

certain type;

- the intermediate or specific consideration, which is different from a

certain agreement to another. For instance, the parties who conclude a sale

contract resume the same instant consideration in all cases; the seller is

interested to obtain the price while the purchaser is interested to acquire the

goods.

Nevertheless, every seller has his or her own intermediate- consideration

for selling (e.g., he or she wants to buy another object with that money, or he

wants to pay a former debt, etc.). At the same time, every purchaser has his own

intermediate consideration for buying (e.g., he or she wants to use the object or

he wants to sell it for a better price, etc.).

In order to support a valid contract, the consideration has to fulfill several

conditions as follows:

- to exist;

- to be real;

- to be non-prohibited by law or public morals (contra bonos mores). For

instance, a promise to undertake a social obligation cannot be considered a valid

one.

The problem of the validity of the consideration does not arise unless the

intermediate cause is analyzed. The instant cause is always valid, being an

abstract one.

In fact, Art.967civ.c. provides two presumptions: firstly, that the

consideration exists, and, secondly that it is valid.


The form The observance of the proper legal form is one of the validity conditions

required for concluding a juridical act.

Within the common understanding, many people assume that juridical acts

should be drawn up in a written form in order to be enforceable. In fact, law does

not usually impose that. There are only a few types of juridical acts that should

be concluded in a certain form imposed by law for their enforceability.

It means that within Romanian law system, the formalism does not apply

as a principle, despite the normal exceptions provided by law.

The legal rules, which stipulate formal requirements, are divided into three

main categories as follows:

*) form requested by law ad validitatem. This form has to be observed for

the very validity of the act, which is compulsory. The non-observance of this form

flaws the act and a later complaining with the legal rules cannot cover the nullity

of the act.

Therefore, several acts are valid only when they are drawn up in a deed

stricto sensu, meaning an authentic form (e.g. donation, sale of land, articles of

partnership or mortgage). Law also requires some formal conditions for certain

other acts, as it is the case of the will (the will is valid only if it is executed in the

accordance with the formalities prescribed by statute for each type of will).

*) Form requested ad probationem. This form has to be observed in order

to proof (to attest) the content of the act, although the act is valid even in the

absence of the due form.

Sometimes, the simple consent of the contracting parties is enough for

concluding a valid agreement and law requires a written form only for constituting

evidences that can be used within a lawsuit. Examples of such acts include

insurance contract, voluntary deposit, lease or settlement.

However, Art.1191 para.1 civ.c. specifically requests the written form for

an act with an object having a value over 250 lei. Due to the power of the

national currency, it means that today, the written form is requested for proving

any agreement.


*) Form requested for the opposability to third party. In other words, the

act is valid between contracting parties, but in order to make it opposable to third

parties, it should be concluded in a specific form. The form imposed by law has

to be also observed; otherwise the act' could not produce its effects over any

third party. For example, there can be mentioned the legal requirement to notify

the debtor within the assignment of debts and the registration of selling and

purchasing contracts of land or of real estate.

In fact, the assignment of debts is a debt transfer to another person's

benefit. Within a contract, one of the contacting parties can transfer his

contractual rights to a third party. The person entitle to do that is the so-called

"assignor" while the recipient of these rights is the so-called "assignee". The

contract between the assignor and the assignee has no effect against the debtor,

unless he or she is informed about that assignment, otherwise the debtor may

validly pay his debts to the assignor.

Being governed by the same rule, a land or real estate contract has

effects only between the seller and the purchaser, unless it is registered in the

real estate register. This is why, the purchaser of the land or other real estate

would not be able to prove his rights in case of eviction from a third party, unless

he or she has observed the due form of act.


THE MODALITIES OF THE JURIDICAL ACT

As it was mentioned above, juridical acts may be pure and simple or

affected by modalities. The act's modalities are future events that determine the

existence or performance of the act.

The modalities of the juridical act are: the term, the condition and the task.

The term

A term is a sure and future event until the beginning or the extinguishing of

a right and of correlative duty adjourns. There are two categories of terms:

suspensive and extinctive terms.

A suspensive term is one that adjourns the beginning of enjoyment of a

right and of correlative duty (e.g. the term 'when the debtor becomes liable for

devolve duty, the so-called term of payment).

An extinctive term is one that adjourns the end of a right and of correlative

duty (e.g. the date of a creditor's death within a life annuity contract).

The term, either suspensive or extinctive, affects only the performance of

the act, not its very existence. Therefore, each of the above categories of tenns

produces different effects as follows:

- If the promisor (the debtor) performs his obligation before the suspensive

term provided by the contract, the payment is valid. In other words, the debtor

has voluntarily renounced to the benefit of the term;

- Until the payment is not due, the creditor cannot claim the payment of his

debt right and the debtor is not liable to pay;

- After the payment is due, the creditor is entitled to pursue the debtor (to

sue) for imposing him to execute his obligation;

- Unlike the suspensive term, the extinctive term brings the debtor's

obligation to its end. It means that the creditor may claim his debt right and the

debtor is liable for his duty;


The condition

A condition is a future and uncertain event, which suspends the creation

or the execution of legal obligation. Apart from term, within condition the

achievement of the future event is not sure. The conditions, as modalities of

juridical acts, can be classified upon many criteria.

Along with specific effects arising from them, there are suspensive

conditions and resolutive conditions.

A suspensive condition is one upon which the enforceability of a

contractual right and its correlative obligation depend. It should occur before the

party executes his obligation within the contract. For instance, ,the further

promise "I'll sell you my apartment, if I have to move in another locality" is a

suspensive condition.

A resolutive condition is one upon which the cancellation of a contractual

right and its correlative obligation depend. If that condition occurs any

performance under the contract takes end. The following example expresses a

promise affected by a resolutive condition "I'll sell you my car, but if I have to

move in another locality, the sale is canceled".

A condition, either suspensive or resolutive, affects not only the

Iperformance of the act but its very existence. Therefore, the condition has the

following effects:

- Until the achievement of the suspensive condition (pendente conditione),

the creditor is not entitled to request the performance of the contract and the

debtor is not liable to execute it. Nevertheless, if the debtor fulfils his obligation,

he can claim the refund of his payment because it was not due. In this case, he is

entitle to obtain the restitution;

- after the achievement of the suspensive condition (eveniente conditione),

the act becomes a, pure and simple one and as consequences the creditor's right

is retroactively strengthened;

- if the suspensive condition cannot be achieved, any juridical relationship

between the parties is retroactively canceled;


- until the fulfillment of the resolutive condition (pendente conditione) the

act has the appearance of a pure an/d simple one and therefore the creditor's

right is enforceable and the debtor is liable to execute his obligation;

- after the resolutive condition is achieved (eveniente conditione), the act

is retroactively canceled. Consequently, the parties should return their achieved

services, just as no contract had been concluded between them;

- if the resolutive condition cannot be achieved, the act is retroactively

considered as a pure and simple one.

Another distinction is made between the fortuitous (causative) condition,

the joint (mixed) condition and the willed ("potestative") condition.

Firstly, a condition is fortuitous (causative) whenever it consists of a

casual event. For instance "I'll lend you my umbrella, if it rains".

Secondly, a condition is joint (mixed) whenever it depends on one of the

parties' will. For example "I'll buy your apartment if I get married until the end of

the year".

Finally, a condition is willed (potestative) whenever it depends only on one

of the parties' will. Law allows the conditions that depends on the promisee's will

(e.g., "I'll buy your apartment, whenever you want to sell it"), but prohibits it if

depends on the promisor's will (e.g. I'll buy your apartment, if I feel like it).

Since it affects the existence of the creditor's right and the debtor's duty,

the condition has a retroactive effect. It means that, its achievement makes the

act a pure and simple one (in case of a suspensive condition), and cancels it (in

case of a resolutive condition).


The task

A task is an obligation to give, to do or not to do, required by the grantor to

the grantee, within a gratuitous act (donation or a legacy, either bequest or

devise). It may be required to the benefit of the grantor, to the grantee's benefit or

to the benefit of a third party.

An example of tasks provided to the grantor's benefit includes the contract

whereby the grantor required to the grantee to pay an amount of money to a third

person. However, the task may never overtake the value of the gift, otherwise the

contract becomes a bilateral one.

A task may be also included in a will. For instance, the devise whereby the

devisor specifically requests that the devisee cultivate the land that constitutes

the object of the devise is a legacy affected by a task provided to the benefit of

the grantee.

A task provided to the benefit of the third party is almost similar with the

contract to the benefit of a third party. Essentially, a contract to the benefit of a

third party is a contract whereby the promisee's primary interest is to bestow a ~ft

upon a third party (e.g. a life insurance whereby the insurance company

promises to pay a certain amount of money to the benefit of a non-contracting

third party if the insured person die).

Unlike the contract to the benefit of the third party, a donation or a legacy

affected by a task stipulated to the benefit of the third party grants the grantee

(e.g., the task imposed to the legatee to pay a certain alimony to the surviving

spouse of the legator).

Whether the grantee does not execute the task, the gratuitous act is not

retroactively canceled, but the grantor may revoke it.


THE EFFECTS OF JURIDICAL ACTS

The effects of the juridical act mean the rights and the correlative duties

that arise, modify or extinguish it. The effects of juridical acts are identically with

their content. Thus, in order to determine the act's effects, the content of the act

(the parties' rights and obligations) should be analyzed together with the parties'

will. It means that the following steps should be achieved:

*) to determine the existence of the act and to prove it through the means

of evidence;

*) to determine the act's effects through the interpretation of the acts'

provIsIOns.

It should be mentioned that the content of each provision expresses the

parties' will and their intention to conclude that particular act.

In order to analyze the content of the act's provisions the following

interpretation rules stipulated by civil code should be observed:

- juridical act has to be interpreted according to the real will of the parties,

despite the literal meaning of the words (Art.977 civ.c.);

- juridical act yields not only the effects the parties had in mind at the time

it was concluded, but also the effects requested by law or by public morals

(Art.970, para. 2 civ.c.);

- the usual clauses of the act are considered written, unless the parties

expressly forbid them (Art.981 civ.c.);

- the clauses of a juridical act are systematically interpreted, according to

the meaning of the whole act (Art.982 civ.c.);

- whenever a clause has two different meanings, it should be interpreted

that it produces effects, not in the way that excludes any effect (Art.978 civ.c.);

- doubtful clauses are interpreted accqrding to the nature of the act

(Art.979 civ.c.);

- if a doubtful clause cannot be understand otherwise, it is interpreted

according to the customs of the place where the act is concluded (Art.980 civ.c.);


- doubtful clauses are always interpreted to the debtor's benefit (Art.983

civ.c.);

- the act will be essentially considered to cause the effects intended by the

parties, no matter how general are the words used in the act (Art.984 civ.c.);

- whenever the parties use an example within the act that does not mean

they intended to restrict their obligations at this example (Art.985 civ.c.).

The effects of a juridical act are governed by the following three principles:

a) the principle of compulsory force of the act;

b) .the principle of irrevocability of the act;' c) the principle of relativeness

(privacy) of the act's effects.

The principle pacta sunt servanda

j The principle of compulsory force of the act is expressed by the Latin I

idiom pacta sunt servanda. Indeed, Art.969civ.c. synthetically expresses this i

idea by stipulating that "the conventions legally concluded have the force of law

between contracting parties".

Furthermore, the principle of compulsory force is effective even upon the

court of law. For instance, the court solves the litigation between parties

according to the legal provisions and also based on the convention existing

between the litigants.

Nevertheless, law expressly provides the exceptions from the compulsory

I force of the act. Thus, despite the parties' will the contract takes end is the

following cases:

- the death, incompetence, insolvency or bankruptcy of any of the

contracting parties terminates the mandate contract (Art. 1552, para.3 civ.c);

- the contracts concluded intuitu personae are generally terminated by the

promisee's death.


The principle of irrevocability of the act

The principle of irrevocability of the act restrains the promisor to revoke his

promise. This rule is a corollary of the. previous one (the principle of compulsory

force of the contract).

By way of exception, there are several cases where the unilateral

revocation of the act is allowed by law. For instance, law allows: - the

cancellation of a gift made by one of the spouse to another (Art.937civ.c.);

- the termination of a lease (rent) contract by the lesee, if there is no

certain term for the contract. A lease is an agreement whereby one party (the so-

called landlord) transfers his or her right into immediate possession to the other

party (the so-called lesee) for a commonly consideration, the so-called rent (Art.

1436 civ.c.);

- the dissolution of a partnership;

- the termination of the gratuitous mandate by any of the parties (Art.

1553-1556);

- the termination of a gratuitous deposit by the deponent (Art. 1616civ.c.).

There are also several unilateral juridical acts that may be merely revoked

by their author, such as:

- the will (Art. 922civ.c). The testator may revoke a will at any time until his

or her death. Notwithstanding, conceptually, a will is not a true juridical act until

the testator's death, because it has no juridical force. Obviously, after the

testator's death it cannot be revoked anymore;

- the relinquish of an inheritance (Art.701civ.c.). To revoke a relinquish of

the inheritance means "to accept the inheritance. Therefore, the conditions

requested for revocation of the relinquish are the same as they are for the

I acceptance of an inheritance (the acceptance should be expressed

within 6 months from the death of the person inherited and the inheritance should

not to be previously accepted by another heir);


The principle of privacy of the act

According to the principle of relativeness (privacy) of the act's effects, the

effects of a juridical act are produced strictly between the parties of the act

(promisor and the promisee). Hence, a plaintiff can maintain a lawsuit only

against the party with whom the contract has been concluded.

In order to understand that principle, the following basic notions have to be

explained:

- party (the so-called "contracting party" in case of a bilateral act);

- third party;

- interested party.

A "party" is a person who concludes a juridical act, either referred to as an

"author" (in case of a unilateral act), or as a "contracting party" (in case of a

bilateral act). Depending on the nature of the act, the parties can have specific

names: grantor-grantee, legator-legatee, assignor-assignee, bargainer-

bargainee, leasor-Ieasee, landlord-tenant, vendor-purchaser, consignor-

consignee, devisordevisee, mortgagor-mortgagee, etc.

From a juridical point of view, a ."party" can be a single person or group of

Itwo or more persons, whether they have the same interest within the act.

A "third party" is a person who was not involved in the conclusion and the

performance of the act.

An "interested party" (known, also, as ayant cause or habentes causam)

lis a non-contracting party who uses the existence of the act as a basis for a

lawsuit.

Essentially, the interested parties are persons who are recognized either

as aving enforceable rights or as being liable for duties created by an act where

they 'e not parties. These persons are grouped into three classes:


1. Universal successors and successors with universal title, either

intestate or testamentary.

A universal heir succeeds an universitas bonorum, with assets and

liabilities, and every juridical act made by the deceased takes effects upon him or

her.

In company law, a case of universal succession is the merging through

absorption. The absorption supposes that a company becomes a part of another

company (the so-called absorbent company). The former company ceases its

existence but the absorbent company continues to exist and succeeds into the

rights and duties owed by the former corporation. One of the absorption effects is

that the absorbent company retains its name and identity' and, at the same time,

acquires the assets, liabilities, franchises and power of the company that ceases

to exist. Another case provided by company law is the merge. Within merge, two

or more companies are united and form a new company. At the same time, the

original companies cease to exist. In both the case, the absorbent company or

the company resulted from merge acquires the assets and liabilities of the former

company/companies, being its universal successor.

Successors with universal title are persons who bequeath a fraction of the

deceased's patrimony. They have the same position like universal heirs, being

bounded by any contract or unilateral act made by the deceased. The only

distinction between them and the universal heirs is that the former inherits a

fraction of the patrimony, whereas the latter inherit a whole patrimony.

For example, within company law, the division of a company leads to such

succession with universal title. Thus, the divided company ceases to exist and

the resultant companies bequeath fraction of its patrimony.

Universal successors and successors with universal title are interested

parties in any act concluded by the deceased because they inherit the patrimony

as it is (e.g. decreased by expensive gifts). Thus, even if they were not parties of

the act, due to their inheritance right, they become interested parties. It should be

mentioned that, there are cases where law allows to a special category of heirs

to avoid the gratuitous acts made by the deceased.


2. Successors with a particular title

A successor with a particular title is a person who acquires a certain

enforceable right, by any lawful transfer. For instance, such persons are the

purchasers, the assignees, the heirs who inherit a specific right. The transferees

are interested persons only related to the acts which fulfill certain conditions as

follows:

- the act is previously concluded;

- the transfer

- the act refers to the right acquired by the transferee.

We emphasize that the transferee can be either a party (in the act

whereby he or she acquires the right), or a third party (in the act which has

another object than the acquired right).

Simple creditors A creditor is a person to whom an obligation is due. According to law, the

creditor has the right to demand and to be recovered by a certain performance of

his debtor. The creditors who are entitled to a lien (e.g. a charge, holds or claims

upon the property of another as security for some debt or charge) are generally

referred to as secured creditors. Apart from them, there are some creditors who

have no such guarantees, known as simple creditors.

Inasmuch as their claims are unsecured, the simple creditors are

interested parties in any juridical act made by their debtor, because such acts

may influence the promisee's solvency. Therefore, law allows them to avoid the

gratuitous acts concluded by their debtor with the view to jeopardize the creditors'

rights.

Let's take the following example: we suppose that X owns $500,000 to Y.

There is considered real exception to the principle of relativeness effects

of the act the so-called contracts to the benefit of a third party (e.g. life insurance

contract).

But, the universal successors and successors with universal title, as well

as the simple creditors are. considered apparent exceptions from above

mentioned principle.


THE NULLITY OF JURIDICAL ACTS

Definition

An act concluded with the observance of legal rules is a valid act. It can be

enforced under the contracting parties and can produces its legal effects

stipulated by law. But, whenever, the legal provisions are not observed and the

act disregards certain legal expressed rules, then the act is void or avoidable. It

means that, an act concluded against law is sanctioned through a specific civil

sanction, the so-called nullity.

The nullity is that juridical means which deprives the act of its effects. It

should be mentioned that, within Romanian legal system, the concept of "nullity"

does not destroy the act itself, but only its effects. Thus, nullity is not seeing as

an organic state of the act. It is only a sanction due to the non-observance of

legal rules at the time when the act was concluded.

The nullity fulfills a preventive function, because the parties refrain from

concluding an unlawful act. But, when the acts are concluded without the

observance of legal rules, then the nullity has a punitive function.

It should be noted that the nullity applies from the moment when the act

was concluded (ex tunc) and consequently the parties are restored to the

positions prior to their agreement. It is just as no act has been ever concluded

between them.

Nevertheless, the nullity is different from dissolution or rescission of the

contract, which presupposes a valid act that cannot produce its effects any more

due to specific events. Thus, the nullity supposes that the act was defectively

created, against law and as result has never existed.


Classification of nullities.

a) The absolute and the relative nullity. An act concluded disregarding the legal provisions could be void or

avoidable, according to the nature of the interests protected by nullity.

When the interests protected by nullity are public interests, the act is null

and void. It means that the nullity is absolute.

If the protected interests are private, the act is only avoidable and the

nullity is relative.

A void act is not enforceable by anyone. It is a null act or an act having no

legal force or validity because it was concluded disregarding the statutory

provision of law. The following reasons call the absolute nullity of an act:

- when one of the validity condition of the act is missing;

- when the object or consideration is prohibited by law or public morals;

- when the act has been concluded by fraud and evasion of law;

- in case of activities performed by a company beyond the powers

conferred upon it by its articles of association or other constitutive deeds (known

as ultra vires acts);

- when a special permission requested by law for the transaction is

mISSIng;

- in case the form requested ad validitatem by law has not been observed.

An avoidable act has an in-between status. It means that it can become a

valid act because one or more of the parties have the power to render it

enforceable. For example if the lack of genuine assent (error, mistake, duress or

injury) occurs within the conclusion of the act, it can be avoided.


This classification presents a particular importance because of the

differences between the rule governing the void and the avoidable acts. Thus:

1. Anybody may claim to make null and void a juridical act. Inasmuch as it

is a high degree of irregularity, law draws no limits in enforceability of the right to

sue.

By contrary, only the interested persons may avoid an act (e.g. the party

whom consent was affected by one of the vices of consent).

2. The absolute nullity can be claimed anytime; there are no limits in time

for claiming an act to be null and void.

As far as the relative nullity is concerned, a party who benefits from nullity

can claim the avoidance of the act only within a specific limit of time, the so-

called extinctive prescription (the general time of extinctive prescription is 3

years).

3. Generally speaking, an avoidable act can produces its effects until its

avoidance is claimed. Thus, it is up to the party who benefits from the nullity to

claim the cancellation of the act. But, if the party ratifies the act by covering its

defects, then the act is valid and produces its effects.

This situation cannot occur for a null and void act that cannot be subject of

ratification because its defects are so essential, that nothing can cover them.

b) According to the extent of the nullity, there are partial and total nullities.

Total nullity affects the whole act, while partial nullity affects only a part of

it. In this latter case, the parts of the act, which are not avoided by nullity,

produce their legal effects.

It should be mentioned that, within Romanian legal system, the partial

nullity is the rule, and the total nullity is the exception, Therefore, whenever it is

possible, the tendency is to save the act, and to cancel only those clauses which

have been drawn up through the non-observance of legal rules.

c) Taking into account if the nullity is or is not provided by law, there are

implied or express nullities.

Whenever law expressly establishes that the infringement of the rule leads

to the state of nullity of the act


By contrary, the nullity is implied when law does not expressly provide it,

but the cancellation (avoidance) of the act results indubitably from that legal

provision. For instance, according to Art.813 civ.c. "all donations should be

concluded in authentic form". In this case, even if law does not expressly provide

the nullity, the act is null because the conditions imposed for its validity have not

been observed.

The effects of nullity and avoidance

As it was mentioned above, the nullity of the act deprives it of its effects.

It is obvious that an act null and void or avoidable cannot produce any

effects in the future (ex nunc). As for the past (ex tunc), the effects should be

retroactively eliminated.

The nullity or avoidance of an act is governed by three principles:

- principle of retroactivity. The rule is that an act null or avoided cannot

produce effects in the future, and the effects already produced will be eliminated.

If the parties of the act have not fulfilled their obligation until the nullity is

established, the judge declares within the nullity the ineffectiveness of the act.

But, when the parties have total or partial fulfilled their obligations, the judge

declares within the nullity or the avoidance of the act the retroactive elimination f

act's effects. Consequently, the parties are liable to return each other the

services already carried.

Nevertheless, this principle has its exceptions as the contracts with

successive execution (e.g., life annuity contract) are. The nullity or the avoidance

If these contracts does not eliminate the effects they have produced in the past.

- principle of restoring the parties into their positions before the contract

(restitution in integrum).

Exceptions to this rule include the right of the bona fide acquirer (i.e., the

~quirer in good faith, having no knowledge that the act is defective) to maintain Ie

benefits yielded by the goods acquired on the basis of a null act.


- principle of cancellation of accessory acts. It means that the nullity or

avoidance of the act also affects the subsequent acts concluded on the basis of a

null act.

This principle represents an exception of the rule .that an accessory act

has the same destiny as the principal act has (accesorium sequitur principale). It

should be mentioned that, the acquirer in good faith is, usually, excepted from

the consequences of this rule.

This classification presents a particular importance because of the

differences between the rule governing the void and the avoidable acts. Thus:

1. Anybody may claim to make null and void a juridical act. Inasmuch as it

is a high degree of irregularity, law draws no limits in enforceability of the right to

sue.

By contrary, only the interested persons may avoid an act (e.g. the party

whom consent was affected by one of the vices of consent).

2. The absolute nullity can be claimed anytime; there are no limits in time

for claiming an act to be null and void.

As far as the relative nullity is concerned, a party who benefits from nullity

can claim the avoidance of the act only within a specific limit of time, the so-

called extinctive prescription (the general time of extinctive prescription is 3

years).

3. Generally speaking, an avoidable act can produces its effects until its

avoidance is claimed. Thus, it is up to the party who benefits from the nullity to

claim the cancellation of the act. But, if the party ratifies the act by covering its

defects, then the act is valid and produces its effects.

This situation cannot occur for a null and void act that cannot be subject of

ratification because its defects are so essential, that nothing can cover them.

b) According to the extent of the nullity, there are partial and total nullities.


Total nullity affects the whole act, while partial nullity affects only a part of

it. In this latter case, the parts of the act, which are not avoided by nullity,

produce their legal effects.

It should be mentioned that, within Romanian legal system, the partial

nullity is the rule, and the total nullity is the exception, Therefore, whenever it is

possible, the tendency is to save the act, and to cancel only those clauses which

have been drawn up through the non-observance of legal rules.

c) Taking into account if the nullity is or is not provided by law, there are

implied or express nullities.

Whenever law expressly establishes that the infringement of the rule leads

to the state of nullity of the act (e.g. Art.822 civ.c. provides the nullity of the acts

affected by a willed condition depending by the promisor's will), the nullity is

expressed.

By contrary, the nullity is implied when law does not expressly provide it,

but the cancellation (avoidance) of the act results indubitably from that legal

provision. For instance, according to Art.813 civ.c. "all donations should be

concluded in authentic form". In this case, even if law does not expressly provide

the nullity, the act is null because the conditions imposed for its validity have not

been observed.

The effects of nullity and avoidance

As it was mentioned above, the nullity of the act deprives it of its effects.

It is obvious that an act null and void or avoidable cannot produce any

effects in the future (ex nunc). As for the past (ex tunc), the effects should be

retroactively eliminated.

The nullity or avoidance of an act is governed by three principles:

- principle of retroactivity. The rule is that an act null or avoided cannot

produce effects in the future, and the effects already produced will be eliminated.


If the parties of the act have not fulfilled their obligation until the nullity is

established, the judge declares within the nullity the ineffectiveness of the act.

But, when the parties have total or partial fulfilled their obligations, the judge

declares within the nullity or the avoidance of the act the retroactive elimination f

act's effects. Consequently, the parties are liable to return each other the ervices

already carried.

Nevertheless, this principle has its exceptions as the contracts with

successive execution (e.g., life annuity contract) are. The nullity or the avoidance

If these contracts does not eliminate the effects they have produced in the past.

- principle of restoring the parties into their positions before the contract

(restitution in integrum).

Exceptions to this rule include the right of the bona fide acquirer (i.e., the

acquirer in good faith, having no knowledge that the act is defective) to maintain

the benefits yielded by the goods acquired on the basis of a null act.

- principle of cancellation of accessory acts. It means that the nullity or

avoidance of the act also affects the subsequent acts concluded on the basis of a

null act.

This principle represents an exception of the rule .that an accessory act

has the same destiny as the principal act has (accesorium sequitur principale). It

should be mentioned that, the acquirer in good faith is, usually, excepted from

the consequences of this rule.

Documents

Course 4 Legal Act