Nullity of sale contract: immoral cause and fictitious price. Simultaneous analysis of two grounds of nullity of the same contract

DREPT CIVIL ŞI DREPT PROCESUAL CIVIL

Abstract

Consensual relationships are not immoral, taking into consideration the principles and values of today’s society, but the conclusion of a civil act (contract) having as determining reason the maintenance of such a relationship is prohibited by the law, because it contradicts the good morals.

The existence of a common immoral cause is not conditioned by the exercise of acts of moral violence by one party against the other.

Even if, as a rule, when several grounds of nullity are invoked and the court considers that one of them is grounded, the other grounds of nullity are no longer analyzed, for obvious reasons related to the usefulness of such an analysis, whereas the defendant – plaintiff requested that the parties be reinstated in the previous situation, by ordering the applicant to reimburse her the amount of 40.500 USD paid as price, in the event that the sale contract is canceled by the Court, the analysis of the other ground for annulment is also relevant in order to determine whether a price refund is necessary.

The fact that in the discussions between the parties prior to the decision to conclude the contract of sale neither party referred to a possible price, although the price is one of the essential elements of the validity of a sale contract, behavior which is not specific to a real process of negotiating the conclusion of a sale contract supports the thesis of the fictitious nature of the price established in the contract. The fact that the sum of 28.500 USD was actually paid is not able to lead to the contrary solution, since the payment was a purely formal operation and the defendant – plaintiff was reimbursed this amount of money after 4 days.