According to art. 509 of the Civil Procedure Code, the review of a judgment disposed on the merits or which evokes the merits may be required if:
◦ it was disposed on matters that were not asked for, it didn’t decide upon a requested matter or it gave more than was asked for;
◦ the subject of the case is not in being;
◦ a judge, witness or expert who took part in the trial, was sentenced for an offense related to the cause or if the judgment was given on the basis of a document declared false during or after judgment, when these circumstances have influenced the judgement in cause;
◦ a judge was given final disciplinary sanction for exercision his position in bad faith or negligence, if these circumstances have influenced the outcome in question;
◦ after the delivery of the judgment, written evidence withheld by the opposing party have been found or which could not be turned in due to a circumstance beyond the control of the parties;
◦ the judgement of a court on which the judgement whose review is requested is based upon was invalidated, it was cancelled or;
◦ the State or other public legal persons, minors and those under judiciary interdiction or those placed under curatorship were not defended at all or were cunningly defended by those charged to defend them;
◦ there are adverse final judgments, by courts of the same grade or different grades, which violates the principle of res judicata of the first judgment;
◦ the party was prevented to appear in court and to inform the court about it, due to a circumstance beyond their will;
◦ the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of fundamental rights or freedoms due to a court decision, and the serious consequences of this violation continue to occur;
◦ after the judgment became final, the Constitutional Court ruled on the objection raised in that case, declaring unconstitutional the provision which was the subject of that exception.
The application must be directed to the court which delivered the judgment whose review is requested. In case there are adverse final rulings, the request for review will be addressed to the court higher in rank than the court which gave the first judgment. If one of the courts is the High Court of Cassation and Justice, the request for review will be judged by that court.
For the first eight review reasons previously mentioned, the revision time limit is of one month and it’s calculated differently for each case separately.
Regarding the case where the party has been prevented from appearing in Court, the deadline is of 15 days and it’s calculated from the date of the impediment.
For the last two reasons given, the term is 3 months from the date when the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, namely the Constitutional Court’s decision has been published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I.
Yes, the court may order the suspension of the decision whose review is required, under the condition of commissioning a bail.
Regarding the proceedings procedure, it is useful to know that meeting the claim is mandatory and the discussions are limited to the admissibility of the review and the facts on which it is based.
For further information on the procedure of reviewing a civil judgement according to the Romanian law, do not hesitate to contact one of our attorneys, who will provide complete and accurate information, updated in line with the latest legislative changes in this field, as well as representation before the competent authorities, when necessary.