Points of law: 1) may a court refuse to affirm an amicable agreement which contains conditions not related to the dispute at hand? 2) whether court should issue a separate ruling in the event of such refusal?

Ratio decidendi: the Presidium held that 1) an amicable agreement is essentially an agreement of particular parties, that is, a transaction between them, and therefore it is governed by civil law rules on the freedom of contract (Art 421, Civil Code); therefore, by virtue of the principle of freedom of contract, the amicable agreement may contain any conditions which are not contrary to laws or other legal acts; and 2) the court’s refusal to affirm it, if such refusal was not formalised as a separate ruling, is unlawful because it deprives parties of their right, as guaranteed by procedural law, to challenge the refusal in the same court.

Practical consequences: the Judgment says that prior court decisions in analogous cases if inconsistent with this interpretation may be reversed in the procedure and within the limits envisaged by Art 311 of the Commercial Procedure Code.