Article 446. Judicial provisions subject to review
(1) Judgments, ordinances, resolutions and irrevocable decisions of all courts may be subject to review, under the conditions of this chapter.
(2) Resolutions terminating the proceedings pursuant to art. 265 letters c) and d), as well as those dismissing the action as being out of time pursuant to art. 1861 may be subject to review. Judicial resolutions that do not concern the merits of the case, as well as decisions issued in relation to them, shall not be subject to review. In these cases, resolutions declaring the review inadmissible shall not be subject to any appeal.
Article 447. Persons entitled to file a request for review
The following are entitled to file a request for review:
a) the parties and other participants in the process;
b) persons who did not participate in the process, but whose rights are violated by the judgment, conclusion or court decision;
c) The government agent, as well as the subjects mentioned in letters a) and b) of this article, in the cases provided for in art. 449 letters g) and h).
Article 448. Courts competent to examine the request for review
(1) The request for review against a decision or order that has become irrevocable due to non-challenge shall be resolved by the court that ruled on the merits.
(2) The request for review against a decision that, being subject to appeal, has been upheld, modified or quashed, issuing a new decision, shall be resolved by the court that upheld, modified the decision or issued a new decision.
(3) – repealed.
(4) – repealed.
Article 449. Grounds for declaring a review
A review shall be declared if:
a) it has been established, by an irrevocable criminal sentence, that a crime has been committed in connection with the case being tried;
b) some essential circumstances or facts of the case have become known that were not and could not have been known to the reviewer, if the latter proves that he/she took all measures to find out the essential circumstances and facts during the previous trial of the case;
c) the court has issued a decision regarding the rights of persons who were not involved in the trial;
d) – repealed;
e) the decision, sentence or decision of the court that served as the basis for issuing the decision or decision whose review is requested has been annulled or amended;
e1) a law declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court has been applied and the exception of unconstitutionality was raised during the trial of the case, and the court has rejected the request for referral to the Constitutional Court or it follows from the decision of the Constitutional Court that a right guaranteed by the Constitution or by international treaties in the field of human rights has been violated;
f) – repealed;
g) the European Court of Human Rights has informed the Government of the Republic of Moldova of the submission of an application from which it is deduced that there is a fundamental defect in the previous procedure, which raises serious doubts as to the correctness of the solution in the contested judgment;
h) the European Court of Human Rights has found, by a judgment, or the Government of the Republic of Moldova has acknowledged, by a declaration, a violation of fundamental rights or freedoms which may be remedied, at least in part, by annulling the judgment delivered by a national court.
Article 450. Time limits for submitting an application for review and their calculation
The request for review shall be submitted:
a) within 3 months from the day on which the criminal sentence became irrevocable – in the case provided for in art. 449 letter a);
b) within 3 months from the day on which the interested person became aware of the circumstances or essential facts of the case that were not and could not have been known to him previously, but no later than 5 years from the date on which the judgment, conclusion or decision became irrevocable – in the case provided for in art. 449 letter b);
c) within 3 months from the day on which the interested person became aware of the respective circumstances – in the case provided for in art. 449 letter c);
d) within 3 months from the day on which the interested person became aware of the annulled or amended judgment, sentence or decision that served as the basis for issuing the judgment or decision whose review is requested – in the case provided for in art. 449 letter e);
d1) within 3 months from the day on which the interested person became aware of the respective circumstances – in the case provided for in art. 449 letter e1);
e) from the time the Government of the Republic of Moldova is informed until the application is resolved by the European Court of Human Rights in the case provided for in art. 449 letter g);
f) within 6 months from the date of the judgment or decision of the European Court of Human Rights – in the case provided for in art. 449 letter h).
Article 451. Filing the request for review
(1) The request for review shall be filed in writing by the persons referred to in art. 447, mandatorily indicating the grounds recorded in art. 449, with the attachment of the evidence confirming them and the proof of payment of the state fee and/or stamp duty in the amount provided for by the State Fee Law no. 213/2023.
(2) The request for review shall be filed with the competent court provided for in art. 448.
(3) – repealed.
(4) The repeated filing of the request for review on the same grounds shall not be allowed.
(5) The review court is entitled to suspend the execution of the decision whose review is requested if a security is lodged under the conditions of art. 435.
Article 4511. Return of the review application
(1) If the review application is submitted without indicating the grounds provided for in art. 449 or without proof of payment of the state fee and/or stamp duty, the judge shall issue a final ruling not to grant the review application and shall grant the reviewer a reasonable term to remedy the deficiencies. If the reviewer remedies the deficiencies within the term granted, the review shall be deemed to have been filed on the date of the initial submission. If the reviewer does not eliminate the deficiencies in the review application or does not present proof of payment of the state fee and/or stamp duty within the granted term, the judge shall return it immediately after the expiry of the reasonable term established by the court for the elimination of the deficiencies.
(2) If exemption, postponement or installment payment of the state fee is requested (with the presentation of supporting documents), the review application shall not be returned, the judge shall rule, by a final ruling, on the submitted request.
(3) If the request regarding exemption from payment of the state fee has been rejected, the judge shall order, by a final ruling, not to grant the request, granting the reviewer a reasonable term for the payment of the state fee. If the reviewer complies with the instructions in the court ruling within the deadline, the review application is considered to have been filed on the date of the initial submission. Otherwise, the judge returns the review application by a ruling that cannot be appealed.
(4) Returning the review application does not prevent the repeated declaration of the review after the deficiencies have been eliminated and the other rules established by law for its declaration have been observed.
Article 452. Examination of the review application
(1) The court shall examine the review application in a public hearing in accordance with the rules for examining the application for summons to court.
(11) If the examination of the review application is within the competence of the Supreme Court of Justice or the court of appeal, the hearings shall be held without notifying the participants in the trial. If the court examining the request for review considers it necessary for the participants in the trial to be present, it shall order their notification.
(2) The debates shall be limited to the admissibility of the review and the facts on which it is based.
(3) The participants in the trial shall be notified of the place, date and time of the hearing. However, their failure to appear shall not prevent the examination of the request for review.
Article 453. Powers and dispositions of the review court
(1) After examining the request for review, the court shall issue one of the following dispositional acts:
a) a ruling rejecting the request for review as inadmissible;
b) a ruling accepting the request for review and quashing the judgment or decision subject to review.
(2) The ruling accepting the request for review shall be pronounced in the deliberation chamber and shall be subject to appeals together with the merits, under the conditions of the law. The court with jurisdiction over the appeal on the merits shall ex officio state the merits and legality of the ruling on the admissibility of the review. If the ruling accepting the request for review is quashed, the court shall admit the appeal, quashing, ex officio, also the dispositional act issued as a result of the re-examination of the case after the review.
(3) The decision rejecting the request for review may be appealed to the hierarchically superior court, except in cases where the request for review is examined by the Supreme Court of Justice.
(4) If a judgment or decision not examined in the appeal has been subject to review, the case shall be tried, after the judgment or decision has been quashed, in accordance with the general rules established by this Code, by the court that admitted the review.
(5) – repealed.
(6) If a judgment previously examined in appeal and in the appeal has been subject to review, the case shall be sent, after the request for review has been admitted, for retrial.
(61) If a decision previously examined on appeal and in cassation has been subject to revision, the case shall be sent, after the application for revision has been admitted, for retrial on appeal if the judicial error cannot be corrected by the cassation court. In the case provided for in art. 449 letter c), the case shall be sent, after the decision has been quashed, for retrial in the first instance.
(7) Following the trial of the case after the application for revision has been admitted, the court shall adopt a decision, which may be subject to the remedies provided for by law for the revised decision.