Vinovatia in raspunderea civila contractuala [Guilt in contractual liability]

The requirement of establishing the guilt of the person who committed an unlawful deed is a problem familiar for most different types of responsibilities (in criminal law, administrative law, disciplinary law). These are the fallowing perplexities related to guilt in contractual liability: • first of all, we must now if guilt does represent or not a requirement for enforcing the responsibility of the debtor that has achieved a bad execution or inexecution (total or partial) of his contractual obligations. The conclusion we came up with is that, unlike the extra contractual civil responsibility, contract liability is based, with no exceptions, on the condition of proving the guilt of the debtor who breached its contractual obligations. • the second problem we had to address refers to the importance of the different forms and levels of guilt (intention or negligence). We have shown that, generally, no matter the form or level of its guilt, the debtor has to make compensation for all damages that were foreseen at the moment the contract was concluded. Exceptionally, when the debtor had the specific and evident intent to defraud his contractual obligations,his contractual liability can be changed into an extra contractual one, so that he can be obliged to compensate even for the damages that could not be foreseen at the moment of concluding the contract. Likewise, the Romanian Civil code establishes that, for the specific and evident intent of selling an object with hidden defects (as these are unknown for the buyer), the debtor in can be obliged not only to return the price he received, but also to repair the damages the creditor may have suffered. • last but not least, we have addressed to the problem regarding the debtors possibility of proving its innocence in breaching his contractual obligations, and, thus, avoiding civil liability enforcement. We have shown that Romanian Civil code does provide the debtor the chance to exonerate its responsibility, by proving that he was unable to respect the contract due to any of the fallowing circumstances: major force, foreign cause, the creditors guilt or the guilt o any other person.