Possessory action in reintegration. Assessing the conditions of the special possessory action in relation to a single act of disturbance of possession. The role of the subjective element in establishing whether there has been a factual disturbance. Distin

JURISPRUDENŢĂ COMENTATĂ ŞI ADNOTATĂ

Abstract

Article 36 of the Civil Procedure Code regulates the parties' procedural quality. The object of the claim consists of the special possessory action for reinstatement. The defendant argues that he did not commit the alleged factual disturbance on which the plaintiff grounds his claim. Consequently, he invokes the plea of lack of locus standi. Both the first instance and the appeal court found that the defendant's claim constituted a substantive matter and not a procedural objection.

The defendant committed the material act at the request of another person. The court of first instance held that in this case there was no factual disturbance of possession, since he had not acted with the intention of contesting the possession of the applicants.

The commission of an isolated material act alone might or might not constitute an act of disturbance.