Through this study, the author starts from the monistic regulation of the current Civil Code, raising for discussion the possibility of adopting a new Commercial Code, which should include all the essential regulations of the special laws in force, with regard to the legal relations in which those who pursue professional activities participate, regulations on the special status of the participants in the legal relations intended for professional activities, the trading companies and the trading professionals who are natural persons, regulations on the contracts and guarantees specific to professional activities (leasing contract, franchise contract, banking contracts and guarantees), regulations on credit titles, the regulation of the insolvency procedure, updated for all areas of professional activity.

The article proposes solutions in the case of concurrence between the reopening of the criminal trial in case of judgment in the absence of convicted person and the resumption of the time limit for appeal, and after an analysis of the two procedures and a comparative analysis of the ordinary and extraordinary means of appeal, it concludes that the reopening of the criminal trial is an extraordinary means of appeal.

The most controversial aspect in the criminal judicial practice, in the situation of invoking the plea of relative nullity of a criminal processual act, is to prove the existence of a processual injury and, related thereto, to prove the sufficient seriousness of the injury caused to the party or to the main processual subject which justifies the cancellation of the act. Most of the times, the party or the subject that invokes the nullity is put in the extremely difficult position to persuade the judicial body that processual injury is sufficiently serious to justify the drastic sanction of nullity. That is why we have considered that it is required a thorough assessment with regard to the standard of probation of injury, of proving the sufficient seriousness of the injury suffered in order to bring about the sanction of nullity. The conclusion we have reached is that the processual injury suffered is sufficient to bring about the sanction of nullity when the violation of the processual rights or guarantees of the parties or of the subjects puts them in the position to no longer be able to defend themselves with the same chance they would have defended themselves if their processual rights had not been infringed.

Having regard to the number of judgments delivered in the field of property and of expropriation against Romania by the European Court of Human Rights, it is necessary to present the relevant principles which this court has set out, principles which the national judge is bound to observe and to apply to concrete cases, in accordance with the provisions of Article 20 of the Constitution. The principles not correlated with actual examples would be devoid of content, therefore the presentation of the most important examples on the basis of the state of fact emphasizes the correct reasoning of the Court, the more so as it has a limited competence to verify the compliance with the domestic law1, attribution which is the responsibility of the national judge.

Throughout more than 150 years of constitutional history in Romania, the Romanian constitutions have provided the modality of engaging the liability of the ministers for their activity. This article aims to make a brief analysis of how it was regulated the liability of ministers in the various constitutions which Romania has adopted over time and of the relation between the political and legal liability of ministers in the Romanian law, starting from the practical realities of recent years. Although, traditionally, in the constitutional law it is made a clear distinction between the political and legal liability, in practice, the boundary between the two types of liability is questionable, especially from the perspective of the legal classification of these types of liability. If the political liability is considered to be that liability of ministers before the Parliament for their political activity which may result in the loss of confidence and the removal from the office of minister, the legal liability has in view how a minister should bear the consequences of the law, by his prosecution and indictment.

Accepting co-authorship in the commission of acts with basic intent has represented, sine die, a permanent struggle for scholars since the adoption of the 1968 Criminal Code. Both the literature and the judiciary have had divergent positions. In the present paper, the purpose is to assess all factors that can lead to a positive or negative answer to the question: Is co-authorship compatible with basic-intent? The analysis will be divided: the national status-quo versus the alternative solution, respectively the German one. In the national arena, the existing arguments and the foundations for the possible envisioned outcomes will be discussed. Within the German framework, the institution of Nebentäterschaft will be assessed in a comparative approach, underlying similarities and differences when compared to the Romanian framework. Finally, a personal note will be added to the mix.

The modality of enforcement through garnishment involves the existence of a legal relationship, in which the pursued debtor has the quality of creditor, and the garnishee has the quality of debtor, a legal relationship used by the pursuing creditor in order to realize the claim from the writ of execution. The garnishment knows two phases, the one of establishment and the one of validation, the second one intervening only if the garnishee fails to fulfil its obligations as a result of communicating the address for establishment of garnishment. The application for validation of the garnishment is a veritable application for summons, its finality being to obtain a writ of execution by the executing creditor against the garnishee. The study examines the defences which the garnishee can invoke in the court of validation, having regard to the legislative solution provided by the current Civil Procedure Code, according to which a garnishee is forbidden to file a contestation to the enforcement against the acts establishing the garnishment, the latter being able to use his defences only before the court of validation [Article 787 (5) of the Civil Procedure Code]. Therefore, the processual means of invoking the defences before the court of validation are analyzed, being questioned the admissibility of the garnishee’s filing of a counter claim aiming at the cancellation of the juridical act from which the relationship between him and the debtor arose. The defences of the garnishee are analyzed starting with the distinction between defences on the merits and the processual and procedural ones, in relation to the possibility conferred to the third party to invoke against the creditor all the pleas and defences that he may oppose to the debtor, to the extent that they are prior to the establishment of garnishment [Article 790 (3) of the Civil Procedure Code].

In principle, except for the emergency situations, it is requested the consent from the parents in order to apply a medical treatment to the minor patient, being essential the minor’s interest and the protection of the minor, of his life and health. In the study there are analysed the legal consequences of having a medical malpractice case for the deed of a physician who, in some situations, applies to a minor patient who is part of the Religious Organization „Jehovah’s Witnesses”, a religious cult recognized by the law in Romania, a treatment based on the blood transfusion, provided that there is a refusal of the parents, who are Jehovah’s Witnesses, on religious grounds1. Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse the treatment based on transfusions of allogenic blood. It must be pointed out the difference between the major person, who is part of the Religious Organization „Jehovah’s Witnesses”, who refuses blood transfusion treatment, requesting treatments alternative to blood transfusion, based on the principle of self-determination and individual autonomy, and the situation involving a refusal of the treatment from the parent for the minor patient (who can not give an informed consent, either because he has no discernment, being under 14 years old, or because he is in the growing up process, 14–18 years old), who is sometimes in a medical condition with risks to his or her health or life, and the physician appeciates that medical treatment based on blood transfusion must be administered, even against the refusal of the minor’s parents, with risks of engaging his liability for medical malpractice.

The stages of the civil trial are: (i) the stage of referral to the court of law (written or initiating the civil trial), (ii) the stage of inquiry of the trial, (iii) the stage of debate on the merits of the trial, (iv) the stage of deliberation and (v) the stage of delivery. The accomplishment of the act of justice in civil matters is materialized through court sittings (which may be public, or in which only the parties participate, or not public, in the cases provided by law) and internal administrative stages carried out by the panel of judges (such as the checking and regularisation of the application). Publicity is a fundamental principle of the civil trial stated by the provisions of Article 17 of the Civil Procedure Code and by Article 12 of the Law No 304/2004, republished. The failure to ensure the publicity of the court sitting brings about the sanction of absolute nullity not conditioned by the existence of an injury under Article 174 (2) by reference to Article 176 point 5 of the Civil Procedure Code. The delivery of the judgment shall usually take place in public sitting, according to Article 402 of the Civil Procedure Code, or, as an exception, by making the solution available to the parties through the mediation of the registry office, pursuant to Article 396 (2) of the same Code, in the assumption that the delivery was postponed (premise condition) for justified reasons and the chairman of the panel has indicated expressis verbis this modality of putting the solution at the disposal of the parties. The delivery of the judgment, as the last processual stage, according to the Civil Procedure Code, can not take place otherwise than by means of a public court sitting, according to the principle of publicity, to which the chairman or a member of the panel of judges read the minutes, also indicating the means of appeal which can be exercised. The fact that the parties understand or not to make use of their right to appear in court (as in the case of other processual stages) does not in any way affect the obligation of the panel of judges to comply with the express provisions of the law in respect of the processual stage of delivery, since there is no such distinction in the law, and ubi lex non distinguit nec non distinguere debemus. In addition, the completion of this final stage of the civil trial is necessary for the parties to make use of their right to formulate orally the means of appeal provided by law, according to Article 126 of the Internal rules of the courts of law of 2015, concluding in this respect a minutes signed by the president of the panel and by the registrar of the sitting.

The provisions of Article 169 of the Law No 85/2014 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and for insolvency regulate the responsibility aimed at covering the debtor’s liabilities in case its assets do not satisfy all the claims of its debtors. The mentioned legal provisions regulate expressly determined cases in which either the members of the supervisory bodies, or the members of the management bodies of the legal person which is in a state of insolvency or any other person that has caused the state of insolvency may be obliged to cover a part of the liabilities of the insolvent debtor, provided that the activity they carried out has led to the insufficiency of the available cash funds from the patrimony of the debtor legal person. In relation to the provisions of Article 171 of the mentioned normative act, the responsibility of the specified persons may be engaged in any form of the procedure, either in judicial reorganization, or in bankruptcy. In case of judicial reorganization, the amounts of money obtained as a result of the responsibility of the mentioned persons are intended to supplement the funds necessary for the continuation of the debtor’s activity, and, in case of bankruptcy, those amounts must ensure that the debtor’s liabilities are covered. The regulation of the responsibility of the members of the supervisory/management bodies or of any other person that has caused the state of insolvency of the debtor legal person is an integral part of the procedure provided by the law on insolvency.

The relation between the civil servant and the public authority or institution in which he occupies the public office arises and is exercised on the basis of the unilateral administrative act of appointment, issued according to the legal provisions, and not by a contractual act. That is why the public function and the status of the civil servant have been regulated in the public law, separately from the labour relations specific to the private law, at the same time also determining the establishment of a specific sanctioning system, which takes into account the distinctive features of the way in which the public office is exercised. In this study there are analysed, from a dual perspective, theoretical and practical, the conditions of each form of the legal liability governed by the administrative law. At the same time, we also consider the cumulation of the disciplinary liability with other forms of legal liability of the civil servant for the damaging consequences of his deeds. A few aspects of novelty brought by the codification of the legislation on the liability of the civil servants in the Draft Administrative Code complete our research.

The content of the medical legal relation includes all rights and obligations of the provider and of the beneficiary of the medical service. Among these, only the rights of the patient benefit by an explicit and ample special regulation and by a growing doctrinal interest. However, this does not mean the lack of specific rights in favour of the doctor, but only the necessity to identify the existence and the determination of their content by analyzing the nature and/or the implicit effects of the legal provisions and of the jurisprudential solutions. Thus, the patient’s acceptance by the doctor, based on Article 663 (1) of the Law No 95/2006, is the equivalent of the informed consent of the patient, expressed pursuant to Articles 660–662 of the Law No 95/2006 and Articles 13–20 of the Law No 46/2003; the interruption of the relation between the doctor and the patient, pursuant to Article 664 (1) c) (ii) of the Law No 95/2006, as a result of a hostile and/or irreverent attitude towards the doctor, would be impossible in the absence of an obligation of gratitude of the patient, correlative to a right to gratitude of the doctor; and the jurisprudential consecration of the liability of the sanitary unit for the damage suffered by the doctor due to a nosocomial infection is due precisely to the existence of a right to security of the doctor.

At the same time with the change of the jurisdiction of the courts vested with the solving of the applications for relocation in the new Civil Procedure Code1, the incidence of a particular situation was ignored: the subsistence of the reasons for relocation also at level of the courts of appeal competent to solve the relocation applications, when the relocation is requested from a court of first instance or a tribunal located in the same locality as the court of appeal, and the legitimate suspicion has sources well-anchored at local level. The High Court of Cassation and Justice was not late in „completing” this omission, by admitting an application for relocation of a relocation process, from the court of appeal in the locality where there were suspicions of lack of impartiality to another court of appeal, contributing, a fortiori, indirectly to the relocation of the substantive litigation to another court, away from the local sphere which did not provide sufficient guarantees of independence of justice.

If any person can admire his own image without any restriction, then anyone is free to fix his/her image by reproduction in different forms (self-portrait, autosculpture, etc.) and finally the image can be exploited by reproduction (here by the question of whom belongs the product of the image, how it can be exploited, who owns the good in the image, how to exploit its image). The central point of the work is the exploitation of the image of persons and goods. We will try to find out what is the legal basis of image protection depending on its subject. In this way, a leap forward will be made in the legal regulation of the right to image followed by a doctrinal and jurisprudential approach to the law that is invoked to protect the image of the goods. We will also try to capture the need for a distinct right to protect the image of goods by correlating it with the mechanism of regulating the right to image of the individual.

This study emphasizes that, from a substantial point of view, the criteria required to be fulfilled for cataloguing a deed as pertaining to the criminal domain are: the qualification of the deed in the domestic law, the nature of the deed and the purpose and the severity of the sanction. Formally, an official report of finding and sanctioning the contravention which represents at the same time also a criminal charge in the conventional sense must cumulatively include the description of the deed and the presentation of the legal classification. The effect of classifying the report of finding and sanctioning the contravention in the category of the criminal charge in a conventional sense is given by the fact that to the procedure for finding and sanctioning the contravention there are attached its own guarantees of a fair trial. The presumption of lawfulness of the report is compatible with the presumption of innocence only if it respects certain limits, taking into account the gravity of the stake and protecting the rights of the defence. The limits of the presumption of lawfulness of the official report, in the context of protecting the rights of the defence, are: the imperative that the deed be perceived directly, through its own senses, by the fact-finding agent and the exigence not to impose on the person concerned an impossible task, as regards the administration of the proof to the contrary.

The legislative unification was the main national project of the Unified Romania. The necessity of achieving this project was emphasized starting right with the days immediately following the declarations of unification of the representatives of the three historical provinces (Basarabia, Bucovina and Transylvania) with the Old Kingdom, and the effort for its achievement continued, in a sinuous dynamics, until after the fatidic year 1940. With very few exceptions, the jurists across the country have declared to be in favour of the legislative unification, regardless of the fact that their opinion has been expressed from the chair, in university studies and classes, in the activity of the unification commissions or of the Legislative Council or in the pretorium of justice.