Termination of a contract certainly raises a multitude of questions for the party wishing to invoke the resolution or termination of the contract. This study intends to present the main out-of-court alternatives available to the parties to a convention, namely the unilateral declaration of resolution and the Commission Pact, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each institution under review, as well as the guidelines of the main legal systems and opinions expressed in the practice that appeared with the entry into force of the new Civil Code. By analyzing all the aspects mentioned above, we tried to facilitate the choice of the party that wants to terminate a contract. We also presented some proposals that could improve the usefulness of these institutions, especially the unilateral declaration of resolution, proposals aimed at the correlation between this declaration and the land book, as well as the various cases that may arise in notarial practice.

The purpose of this article is to approach the common features of medicine and law – the principles which have to govern the medical behaviour and medical liability. Medical principles were often ignored by legal literature (which is so hard to find), but there are a few notes in medical ethics. Medical principles rule the manner in which the provider of medical services, devices, pharmaceuticals, the doctor and the National Health Insurance House are acting in regard to the patient. Meanwhile, ignoring this principles will lead to engaging the liability of doctors, providers of medical services, the devices and pharmaceuticals or, even worse, may result in the agreement’s invalidity. These principles constitute the foundation of a new era, under construction – medical law and they need to become the primary rule for those who are involved in both medicine and law. Our research revealed that medical law is at its beginnings. The purpose of this study is to offer an in-depth analysis and understanding of medical law, by studying its bases (medical principles).

Family relationships are an area of great interest due to its intimacy and sensitivity. Because of the unpredictability of modern life, many families are falling apart. Thus, the issue of dissolution of marriage, whether through divorce or separation, is of paramount importance for modern society. Both the European Union and some Member States, especially the predominantly Catholic ones, have adapted to religious realities and regulated spouses’ separation through secular laws. The purpose of this article is to reveal that the Romanian law has the institution of spouses’ separation which produces, however, only effects of canon law, and not of civil law. The methods used in support of our thesis are analysis and synthesis. In Romania, the state recognized the Canonical Codes of the Roman-Catholic and Oriental Churches that provide for separation. But it denies any civil, secular effects of the institution. It is high time for the Romanian legislator to regulate the institution of spouses’ separation whether by altering the Civil Code or through a concordat between the state and the Holy See. The secular effects of spouses’ separation will protect the religious freedom of the Catholic people and the traditions of the Roman Catholic denomination. Moreover, introducing legal separation in the Romanian law will ensure a better application of the private international law of the European Union which provides for the international jurisdiction and for the law applicable to such separation.

Arbitrability is the entry point of arbitration: it identifies those cases which can be settled by way of arbitration and in which the parties can exclude court procedures and state courts. This article examines, in light of the applicable international treaties, the choice-of-law rule that determines the law applicable to arbitrability and, in order to establish this choice-of-law rule, analyzes the purpose of arbitrability. It argues that arbitrability should be conceived as a question of competence and not as a question emerging from public policy. It follows from this thesis that the application of the law of the forum (lex fori), the dominant approach in international treaty law, is not justified and the exclusion of arbitrability is warranted only in cases which belong to the exclusive competence of the courts of or raise real problems of public policy for the forum.