Solving causes by report to the principles of the Strasbourg Court

This study aims to find a new perspective for interpretation in cases where the judgments of the international courts (in particular the European Court of Human Rights) are contradictory or create uncertainty, so that they cannot be effectively considered when judging. It is known that the national judge must take into account the judgments of the Strasbourg Court to prevent a possible condemnation of the Romanian state, but when the conventional block is not unitary, we need to find a benchmark that helps us correctly solve the case. We believe that, in these circumstances, relying on the principles of law is necessary, and the principle of trust in justice can be a new, determining factor, in choosing a concrete legal solution. In order to demonstrate the effectiveness this interpretation, a practical case will also be analysed, on the basis of which the implications of such a method can be highlighted. Moreover, the principle of trust in judgments could be used in other cases similar to the practical situation presented and could become a concrete way of interpretation in cases of case law overruling or case law uncertainties, so that the individual’s rights are not injured