In the doctrine of the specialty there appeared three theories as to the juridical nature of the acceptance of the offer. In the first theory the acceptance represents a juridical fact. It has been reasoned that this declaration of will is not subject to notification. Only in this way can be explained why the tacit acceptance or, in some cases, the execution of the offer produces juridical effects. Another criterion which has been proposed is the one to determine the character of efficiency of acceptance – juridical or practical. Supporters of this theory declare that acceptance is subordinated to a practical efficiency, that of being familiar to the offerer, and not juridical that the finalizing of the contract depends on. The contract will be executed only of the offerer gets informed of the acceptance. According to another theory, acceptance is a subjective right, which being part of the category of subjective rights will be considered to become part of the acceptant’s patrimony by virtue of an accord realized by emission of the offer. This solution is criticized both due to the hypothetic character of the realized accord and due to the fact that the offerer cannot be a passive subject in a potestative law. The third theory states that acceptance is a unilateral act. The effects produced by the acceptance are identical to those of the civil juridical act – the appearance, modification or extinction of juridical relations – respectively the acts by means of which rights and obligations are transferred, acts by means of which rights are abandoned, and acts by means of which rights and obligations are accepted. Also, being a declaration of will, it can be corrupted by stimulating nullity or cancellability of the consent, sanctions specific to juridical acts.