Judicial Costs in Remand Proceedings: Clarifications from the Court of Cassation with Order No. 16645/2025

The issue of legal costs has always been a crucial point in any litigation, capable of influencing procedural strategies and the final outcome for the parties. In this context, Order No. 16645, issued by the Court of Cassation on June 21, 2025, serves as a beacon of clarity, precisely outlining the duties of the remand judge regarding the taxation of procedural costs. This ruling, presided over by Dr. A. S. and drafted by Dr. E. V., addresses an aspect of fundamental practical importance, often a source of uncertainty for legal professionals and citizens.

Remand Proceedings and the Issue of Costs

When a case, after being examined by the Court of Cassation, is 'remanded' to another judge (or to the same judge with a different composition), it means that the Supreme Court has identified legal errors in the appealed judgment and has requested a new examination of the merits. The remand judge, therefore, is not called upon to re-examine the entire dispute from scratch, but to decide in accordance with the legal principles established by the Court of Cassation. An often delicate aspect of this phase is precisely the management of procedural costs, which can accumulate through the various levels of judgment: first instance, appeal, and finally, the judgment of legitimacy.

The relevant legislation, particularly Articles 91 and 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, establishes the general principle that costs follow the losing party. However, the application of this principle in the complex mechanism of remand proceedings has required specific jurisprudential interventions to ensure uniformity and legal certainty. The decision of the Court of Cassation, in the case between C. and G., offers a valuable interpretation.

Order No. 16645/2025: The Principle of Overall Defeat

The Court of Cassation, with Order No. 16645 of 2025, has reiterated and clarified a cardinal principle that must guide the remand judge in taxing costs. The headnote extracted from the ruling is illuminating:

The remand judge, to whom the case is referred by the Court of Cassation, also to decide on the costs of the legitimacy proceedings, is required to rule on the costs of the appeal phases, if the appeal is rejected, and on those of the entire proceedings, if the first-instance judgment is reformed, according to the principle of defeat applied to the overall outcome of the proceedings, rather than to the different levels thereof and their results.

This statement is of fundamental importance. It means that the remand judge must not limit themselves to considering who was right or wrong in a single level of judgment (e.g., only in appeal or only in the remand), but must assess the overall outcome of the entire procedural matter. The principle of defeat, therefore, must be applied not in 'watertight compartments,' but by looking at who ultimately emerged as the winner and who as the loser at the end of the entire judicial process, including the appeals and the remand proceedings. This approach avoids fragmentation and ensures greater consistency in the allocation of economic burdens.

Practical Implications and Useful Advice

Order No. 16645/2025 has significant practical implications. For lawyers and parties to a lawsuit, it is essential to consider the final outcome of the entire process from the initial stages, especially when undertaking appeal actions. Here are some key points to keep in mind:

• Holistic View: Procedural strategy must always aim for the final result, knowing that costs will be taxed based on overall defeat.
• Attention to Remand: If the Court of Cassation remands the case, the judge to whom it is referred will have the task of re-determining the costs of all previous levels, not just those of the legitimacy proceedings.
• Evaluation Criteria: The remand judge will need to carefully assess whether to reject the appeal (ruling on the costs of the appeal phases) or to reform the first-instance judgment (ruling on the costs of the entire proceedings).

This ruling aligns with previous orientations of the Court of Cassation, such as headnote No. 15506 of 2018, which already highlighted the importance of a unified vision in taxing costs, strengthening legal certainty in such a delicate area.

Conclusions

Order No. 16645 of June 21, 2025, from the Court of Cassation represents an indispensable reference point for the correct management of legal costs in remand proceedings. By emphasizing the application of the principle of defeat to the overall outcome of the proceedings, the Supreme Court offers clear and definitive guidance, helping to overcome uncertainties and promote greater fairness in the allocation of procedural burdens. For legal professionals and anyone facing litigation, fully understanding the dictates of this order is fundamental for a conscious and strategic management of their procedural position.