Starting from a decision made in the interest of the law by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, which stated that the terms regulated in art. 278 para. 3 and in art. 2781 para. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for exercising the remedy of complaint against resolutions or ordinances of the prosecutor for not sending a case to justice, can only represent peremptory procedural terms, the article analyses the consequences on the fairness of the procedure of non-settlement by the hierarchically superior prosecutor, within the deadline provided by law, of the complaint against the solution of not sending a case to justice, reaching the conclusion that the legal text under review should be reconfigured, either by way of clarifying the nature of the term provided in art. 277 of the Criminal Procedure Code as a lapse term, or by way of linking the term referred to in art. 2781 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the time of communication of the solution of the hierarchically superior prosecutor, to avoid “deviations” from the fairness principle.