The diplomatic activity of the states may have a highly positive part in the normal course of the development of international relationships, so that certain disputes or other negative consequences may be prevented in fields of common interest, such as: the observance of the right to self-determination of the states, the limitation of environmental pollution, the correct usage of natural resources, the fight against terrorism or the enforcement of international treaties.

The termination of synallagmatic contracts with execution uno ictu represents a common cause in the judicial practice for the annulment of agreements which generates reinstatement of the parties in the former condition, by mutual restitution of the considerations executed by each of them. When the agreement is transferable of property, as consequence of the reinstatement of the parties in the former condition, the asset returns from the acquirer’s to the allienator’s patrimony, the latter having the obligation to return the delivered performance. In case a precautionary measure is established over the acquirer’s patrimony, such as distraint, the asset is frozen, thus being questioned if it can be discharged from the acquirer’s patrimony as consequence of termination. The author estimates that such thing is possible, because such discharge is not voluntary, but forced, as the pros and cons are detailed in the content of this article. Moreover, there is a series of procedural aspects that must be taken into account by the court of law invested with the settlement of such termination request.

Currently, disputes arising from the application of Law no. 85/2006 are a significant part of Romanian contentious matters, the role of the specialized sections within the courts throughout the country being most often overcrowded. For the years of crisis, insolvency is what claims and disputes arising from the property restitution laws enforcement meant for the years of increased growth. Although civil law specialists with tradition find the insolvency proceedings regulation quite simple, it arises nevertheless a number of interesting legal issues, worth a deeper look. One of these is the issue of compatibility between the intervention institution governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, and the applications specific to insolvency proceedings. Due to the fact that our jurisprudence has provided no consistent reply yet to this issue, the author states the reasons for which a particular solution (rule and exception) seems to be required.

Presently, Article 527 (1) of the Civil Code, materializing a jurisprudential solution and a doctrinal thesis substantiated under the influence of the Family Code, provides that „only the person who has the means to pay or has the possibility to acquire these means may be forced to provide maintenance” (s.n. – T.B.). This text, in relation to the provisions of Article 42 (2) c) of the Constitution, raises the question of the possibility of forcing to labour the debtor of the legal maintenance obligation, who is fit to work, but who, for reasons imputable to him, does not earn incomes from work, nor has any other means to meet this obligation”. Despite some contrary opinions, the proposed study is intended as a contribution to the logicallegal argumentation of this „legal possibility”.