Admissibility of the application for review based on Article 509 para. 1, item 1 of the Civil Procedure Code. The condition to refer to the merits in the judgment to be reviewed. The notion of evoking the case merits

DREPT CIVIL ŞI PROCESUAL CIVIL

Abstract

Subject to the exceptions provided for by law, only judgments which refer to the merits may be subject to review, such as, for example, judgments of the first instance, except for those in which the application was dismissed or annulled on the basis of a procedural objection without being examined on the merits; judgments of the court of appeal dismissing the appeal as unfounded or allowing the appeal and changing all or part of the judgment under appeal; judgments of the court of appeal given as a result of a retrial of the merits after the case was quashed and held, etc. .

Judgments which do not examine or refer to the merits, such as, for example, a judgment declining jurisdiction, an injunction, a jurisdiction regulation, etc., are not subject to review.

Since they do not analyse or refer to the merits of the case, the orders in which the court explains the enacting terms of the decision handed down on appeal or rectifies material errors in the decision are not subject to review.

In the present case, the judgment No 53/A/16.03.2021 delivered by the Court of Vâlcea - which is the subject of the application for review - does not examine the merits of the case, but only clarifies the meaning, scope or application of the provisions of the civil decision No 468/A/24.04.2018 delivered by the Court of Vâlcea in case No (...)/288/2017. The application for review against it is therefore inadmissible, as the conditions laid down in Article 509 para. 1 of the Civil Procedure Code.