The Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No. 421/2016 (April 2), held that a cooperation and financial support agreement was unlawful because the principal associate was not registered in the insurer‑specific register required by Law 35(I)/2002. The dispute involved an insurance company seeking €43,402 as an outstanding balance after advances and commissions; the trial court had awarded the sum based on the associate’s registration with another insurer. The Supreme Court reversed, finding registration is company‑specific, that both parties proceeded while approval from the superintendent of insurance was pending, and that illegality touching the core activity precludes any cause of action and bars remedies, including unjust enrichment claims.

The ruling underscores that registration and licensing requirements in regulated sectors are prerequisites for enforceable contracts. Professionals and companies that commence intermediary activity before obtaining company‑specific registration or formal approvals risk losing contractual and judicial protection and cannot rely on enrichment doctrines to cure unlawfulness.