ro fr
universul juridic magazin

Operating modes and mechanism of termination of the unilateral declaration of annulment

It would seem that the text of Art. 1550 of the Civil Code establishes three operating modes of termination: by court order, by the unilateral declaration of annulment and of right. In other words, the third mode of operation, respectively de jure, would not depend on a unilateral expression of will of the creditor, that is exercising its option right. Such an understanding of the text cannot be accepted, however, that he would not only allow the creditor, but also the debtor to invoke termination, as is the case for the abolition of the contract in the event of accidental impossibility of execution. The solution would be profoundly unfair as it would leave the execution of the contract at the self will of the debtor. The difference between the non-execution without justification and the non-execution caused by accidental impossibility, namely justified nonexecution, is determined just by the fact that in one case the non-execution is attributable to the debtor, and in the other case it is caused by a foreign issue. Without resuming any considerations previously made about the need of the unilateral declaration of annulment even in the supposition that the termination of right or de jure of the contract would be set forth in a commissoria lex as a result of the non-execution attributable to the debtor, it has to be remarked only that, mostly, the doctrine and case law in Romania and France considered that such a formulation does not exclude the right of the creditor’s option whether to require enforcement of the contract, in kind or compensation, and put his own will work to determine the termination of the contract.