The appearance in 2004 of Law no. 554 on administrative litigation brought a new perspective on this institution, with all the necessary implications. Many of the concepts specific to administrative litigation have been rethought, including the issue of damages, a matter of the utmost importance, given that, we are on the ground of a struggle between the state, on the one hand, and the individual, on the other. In most cases, the annulment of an administrative act cannot but entail a compensation to which the person who obtained the annulment of the act is fully entitled. The same reasoning is similar if the authority refuses to respond within the legal deadlines. In addition to the pecuniary damage, it is obvious that the moral damage will also be discussed, because, in addition to the actual damage suffered, the claimant can prove that he also suffered moral damage. Therefore, the authority can be held responsible for illegal conduct (by annulling the act or recognizing the right) and can also be held responsible for paying amounts of money that, not infrequently, can reach quite significant values for the public budget. Precisely for this reason, I considered useful a review of what involves the issue of damages in administrative litigation, related to those recently ruled by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, in an appeal in the interest of the law.