-
European democratic societies have shown, in recent years, an increased interest in reforming justice, the aim being to make more efficient the process of administration thereof. Likewise the efficiency of justice is a complex and continuous process which involves, among other things, guaranteeing the quality of the judicial decision and resolving the cases within a reasonable time. Within the present approach the author made a radiography of the most important reforms initiated and partially carried out in France, Italy and Spain. The investigation carried out has led to the conclusion of the existence of some common regulatory trends, but also to the existence of some different solutions. Common trends have been identified in terms of judicial organization, distinguishing itself a process of concentration of jurisdictions and of specialization thereof. The most significant example from this point of view is that of France, a country where a recent reform has led to the merger of the courts with the high courts. The courts resulting from this concentration are called judicial courts. In Spain, the justice reforms were initiated in 2001 following the conclusion of a „State Agreement” between the Government, the People’s Party and the Socialist Party. In Italy in recent years it was undertaken a reform which led to the increase in the competence of justices of the peace. In all the mentioned states there was also a marked tendency towards making more efficient the alternative ways of resolving the conflicts. Different procedural and judicial options were found regarding the composition of the superior councils of the magistracy, the organization of judicial inspections and the organization of the Public Ministry. Such options take into account the particularities of each judicial system, which excludes a total uniformity and are part of the democratic processes aimed at consolidating the state of law. -
By reference to the real guarantees, which, theoretically, ensure a greater security of the execution, the fidejussion prevails by a lower degree of formalism and by a much higher degree of flexibility. Through the fidejussion mechanism, the creditor will have as common guarantee at least two patrimonies: first of all, of course, the patrimony of the main debtor, but in addition to this patrimony it can also be satisfied from the patrimony of the fidejussor or fidejussors. No one can become a fidejussor-guarantor against his will. Regardless of its nature, the fidejussion has a contractual nature, being able to arise only through the agreement between the creditor and the fidejussor. The law or the judgment only requires to bring a personal guarantee. When a person is obliged, by law or by convention, to provide bail, and he does not voluntarily fulfil his obligation, the judgment of conviction does not convert the bail into a judicial one, it still remains legal or conventional, as the case may be. The judge only orders the execution of the legal provision or of the convention. Exceptionally, in certain situations, the law absolutely presumes the quality of a certain person as fidejussor. For example, there is a fidejussion, called an assimilated fidejussion, also in case a party undertakes to another party to grant a loan to a third party, in which case the creditor (the person to whom the commitment has been made) is guarantor (fidejussor) of the obligation to repay the loan received by the third party.
-
The additional acts do not enjoy a legal definition in the labour legislation, although some legal texts make reference thereto or the necessity of their conclusion results from the interpretation of the legal provisions. At the same time, the conclusion of the additional act to the individual labour contract is frequently used in practice. Among the measures to make the labour relations more flexible is the temporary change of the workplace at the domicile of the employee, in which situation there must be concluded an additional act to the individual labour contract. It is necessary de lege ferenda to enshrine a legal definition of the additional act in the Labour Code.
-
Since the beginning of the 19th century, the phenomenon of immigration has increased in Argentine. In the 20th century, the majority of immigrants came from the European continent. Despite some tempering measures, the immigration to Argentina continues to manifest itself, producing legal consequences. The family relations of foreigners are ruled, like other types of social relations with a foreign element, by private international law. This paper aims to analyse the current state of marriage regulations in Argentine private international law (with brief historical forays to understand the evolution). The scientific impact of this paper is increased by the novelty of the studied legislation and by the low interest that the Romanian doctrine has shown for the legal realities in Latin America. Its conclusions are relevant both to researchers and legal practitioners and to the general public, interested in resolving the many legal issues involved in a marriage with an Argentine citizen or immigration to Argentina.
-
Intimately linked to the concept of sustainable development, the theory that future generations are the subject of law has aroused lively discussions at doctrinal level, at home and abroad. There are also international conferences: e.g. the Stockholm Conference of 1972, which for the first time warned of the future of humanity itself, as a result of environmental deterioration, following human activities; The Brundtland report of the World Commission for Environment and Development appeared in 1987, entitled „our common future”. The EU’s interest, in which Romania is a member state, in sustainable development has grown in parallel with the United Nations initiative for this concept and has resulted in a number of environmental action programs and strategies that have led to the development of numerous acts to translate them into practice, because everything has become or must became „sustainable” – economy, transport, industry, energy, consumption, agriculture.
-
7 years after the entry into force of the new Civil Procedure Code, without claiming to make an exhaustive inventory of what could partially be called a failure of regulation and/or of application, the legal institutions and the judicial procedure with a new face, perhaps even revolutionary, or those only reformed and/or refurbished regulated by the new Civil Procedure Code have demonstrated successively or simultaneously their insufficiency or inefficiency, some being dysfunctional due to their own internal causes, others due to external causes referring, as a rule, to the absence of the adequate human, material and financial resources or simply as a result of the deformation by acclimatization by the courts, parties and participants in the civil trial, the examples being numerous. Under these circumstances, the necessity to regulate within the new Civil Procedure Code of a simplified court procedure results from the very materiality of the facts. The specificity of this simplified court procedure would be that it would imply to exclusively go through the written stage of the civil trial, possibly of a written stage more extensive than the current one regulated by Article 201 of the Civil Procedure Code, at the end of which the date of pronouncing the judgment will be established by administrative resolution. In this way, the duration for solving some cases with a medium or low complexity would be significantly shortened, by eliminating the time period between the date of completion of the written stage and the first trial term
-
Modern society is based on the predominance of organic solidarity over mechanical solidarity and, consequently, on the predominance of the law which ensures cooperation between autonomous subjects from repressive law, which sanctions, through penalty, any deviation from the standards of the common conscience. Modern society is „civilized”, i.e. it is firstly and foremost based on „civil” law, the repressive law only being exceptional, which translates into three principles: that of the subsidiarity of criminal law, that of the necessity and legality of offences and penalties, and that of the additional protection of individual freedom when the subject is criminally charged. The consequence thereof is that, in modern liberal democracies, all repressive law is criminal, that any charge which may lead to the application of a repressive sanction is a criminal charge and that the law-maker cannot assign to the administration the competence regarding the application of repressive sanctions. Under these circumstances, the transformation of some repressive norms into norms of administrative law is a violation of the fundamental principles that structure the legal order of modern liberal states. Nonetheless, this type of practice is becoming more common. In order to ensure individual freedom, this tendency must be corrected. As politicians are not willing to do so, naturally this is a task for the judicial courts, that can rely for this endeavour on the European Court of Human Rights’ constructive jurisprudence.
-
The author aims to present a historical perspective by connecting to the current juridical perspective, addressing and making an exegesis of one of the institutions which are convergent to the two essential procedural codifications, namely the Civil Procedure Code and the Criminal Procedure Code, but rather incompletely regulated by the legislator, namely the offence of hearing. Emphasizing the fact that in neither of the two Procedure Codes the notion of the offence of hearing is not expressely and categorically defined, the legislator has conceptualized the procedure which is going to be followed by the judge insofar as he directly finds, through his own senses, such an offence/deed provided by the criminal law, the two procedures presenting similarities, but also differences, some of them being non-resilient to scientific criticism, as we will try to demonstrate this conclusion in the content of the material, in which there have been inserted de lege ferenda proposals as well.
-
Offences against police officers or gendarmes (in Romanian, ultraj) are regulated under Article 257 (4) of the Criminal Code, which provides that such offences shall be harsher punished, by increasing the special limits of the penalty by half. In order to apply the above-mentioned dispositions in a fair manner, the Panel for Clarification of Criminal Legal Aspects of the High Court of Cassation and Justice was requested to render a preliminary judgment by which to clarify if „the concept of police officer provided by Article 257 (4) of the Criminal Code shall be construed restrictively as referring only to police officers whose activity and status are regulated under Law No 218/2002 regarding the organisation and functioning of Romanian Police and under Law No 360/2002 regarding the Police Officer Status or more widely, as also including local police officers whose activity and status are regulated under Law No 155/2010 on Local Police and Law No 188/1999 on the Status of Civil Servants”. This article proposes an analysis of the relevant jurisprudence and provides arguments to support that the aggravated version of the crime regulated under Article 257 (4) of the Criminal Code shall be applied when the offence is committed against a local police officer.
-
This study is intended to approach the legislative models of the definition of the offence in the criminal legislations of the Romanian area (Romania and Republic of Moldova). Three concepts were identified through the prism of which in the reference legislations was defined the notion of offence: substantial or material concept, formal concept and substantial-formal concept. These models were determined by the social interests that formed the object of the legal-criminal protection in the corresponding period of the development of society.
-
As a fundamental instrument for ensuring the functioning of the European Union legal order, the action for the non-compliance with the European obligations is the judicial instrument by which the Union authorities, led by the Commission and the Luxembourg jurisdictional structure, exercise direct control over the conduct of the Member States in relation to EU law imperatives. Located somewhere in the middle between the legality control and the action for liability, the non-compliance with the obligations raises separate and complex issues difficult to understand in the absence of the vast jurisdictional experience of the Court of Justice of the European Union. If, under procedural terms, the present action does not present particular challenges, imposing, as a rule, a mechanism for cooperation between the European Commission and the defendant Member State (as a pre-contentious phase), in which the Court of Justice often plays a subsidiary role (contentious phase), from a material point of view, the non-compliance with the European obligations involves different forms and meanings that transcend both the letter and the spirit of the treaties, even in their current form, consolidated after the Treaty of Lisbon (2009). In such a context, the present study aims to review the most frequently used meanings which the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union has given to the phrase „non-compliance with European obligations”, in the light of current regulations, past experiences and, last but not least, the aim pursued by this procedure, namely to sanction any derogation from the uniform and synchronized application of the European Union law.
-
Organizațiile societății civile pot fi uneori demersul cel mai accesibil și eficace pentru cetățeni, de a acționa pentru apărarea unui drept sau interes legitim. În plus, membrii grupurilor pot avea un cuvânt greu de spus cu privire la acțiunile ori inacțiunile statului. Aceste aspecte creionează o forță civică, ce, folosită cu bună-credință, poate duce la progresul întregii națiuni. În absența unui simț civic dezvoltat, comportamentul unor persoane ce doresc a abuza de o organizație a societății civile apare ca fiind extrem de nociv pentru democrație1 . Practic, dintre acei puțini români ce se implică, o parte nu urmăresc dezvoltarea comunității, ci propria bunăstare.
