The author summarizes the contractual solidarity principle and its overall consequences. At the core of contractual solidarity lies the requirement of reconciling the contractual interests of the parties. Compliance with this requirement stems from the relationship of solidarity between the parties in the context of contract performance and is intended to govern the being and its execution, including the consequences of breaching this tie, should either party be in default. Contract performance supposes the existence and action of solidarity relationship between the Contracting Parties, each laying under the obligation to accomplish the contractual interests of the other Party. Effective and beneficial accomplishment of said objective is ensured by complying the cooperation and coherence duties, which originate and argument their existence in strict relationship of contractual solidarity. The requirement to reconcile the interests of the parties is valid also if difficulties arise for either party during the contract performance. To overcome these difficulties, the parties are required to comply with two duties: the duty of tolerance and the duty of contract adjustment. Finally, the author reveals that the requirement above is meant to govern also consequences arisen from the breach of solidarity ties, in terms of contract unlawful non-performance. Thus, in selecting and implementing remedies and powers it may appeal to, the creditor is bound to comply with the internal consistency of the contract and the duty of fair proportionality or measures; the aim of these duties is the taking-up by the creditor of behaviors consistent with the purpose of the privilege chosen, without contradictions and disproportions in terms of the seriousness of unlawful contract nonperformance by the debtor.The author concludes that the constituent elements of contractual solidarity, on account of their action and effects, are likely to ensure proper performance of duties, to save contracts existence and, ultimately, to accomplish the interests of contracting parties, the purpose of any contractual tie.
Article 322 section 5, second phrase of the (Romanian) Code of Civil Procedure provides that review of a final and binding decision in the Appellate Court or non-appealed and of a ruling passed by a court of last resort upon merits called forth may be requested „whether, following the rendering of the decision, a court order which grounded the decision under review claimed was abated or amended.” The author, in light of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, considers that the purport should be interpreted narrowly. Accordingly, the scope of Article 322 section 5, second phrase of the (Romanian) Code of Civil Procedure may cover uncertified court orders exclusively (referred to as binding) because only these can be amended / abated under appeal or recourse, and not judgments passed within right of review procedures such as review or appeal for annulment, on account of complying with the principle of legal certainty.