-
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. -
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.
-
The neutral power, i.e. a power that is situated outside the three powers derived from the organisation of the state on the basis of the principle of separation of powers, was conceived and institutionalised in various ways. One of them transforms the Head of State into a power that distances itself from political games and the separation of powers. The Head of State plays the role of balancing power and that of mediator between legislative, executive and jurisdictional powers and between state and society. The following article examines the role of the Head of State as neutral power in the constitutional history of Romania and in the 1991 Constitution.
-
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 postponing of the application of punishment is an institution recently introduced in the Criminal Code, creating problems of interpretation both in the doctrine and in the judicial practice, especially on two levels: the terminology used and the systematization of the substantive and procedural provisions in the legislation. These issues affect the institutions of the revocation and annulment of postponing the application of punishment.
-
-
-
This study proposes an analysis of the regulation of the institution of return by right of ownership of land located in the built-up area, with particular reference to the interpretation of the provisions of Article 25 (1) of the Law No 18/1991, amended, supplemented and republished. In the thematic approach, there are presented a series of reasons meant to clarify the legal content of the terminology of the text, emphasizing the jurisprudential meaning of the syntagms used by the legislator. Thus, the notions of reconstitution, constitution and return by right of ownership are analyzed distinctly, showing that the text of law in question is incidental both in the assumption that the agricultural cooperative of production has attributed lots for use in the gardens located in the built-up area of the former owners to third parties, cooperative members who were not the owners of that land, and in the assumption that such lots were attributed to the former owners themselves, who became members of C.A.P., either on the same site, in continuation of the 250 square meters of personal property, according to the regulations of that time (the dwelling house and household dependencies, the land on which they were located and the yard), or on another site in the built-up area. Some critical remarks are made on some approaches coming from a land fund county commission, but also from the court, which, in our opinion, did not take into account the conceptual efforts of the doctrine and the judicial practice in the matter. We are convinced that reading this study will effectively contribute to the reduction to evanescence of the risk of bringing prejudice to the real protection guaranteed by the legal order in the field of establishment, defence and exercise of the legitimate rights and interests of the persons covered by this text of law.
-
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.
-
In this study we are making reference to the refusal to accept the bill of exchange and the extraordinary acceptance in the Republic of Moldova and Romania. By accepting the bill of exchange, the drawer becomes the principal debtor and, consequently, the bill of exchange must be presented to him. In case the drawee refuses the acceptance of the bill of exchange, the statement of refusal must be ascertained, within the time limits set for presentation on acceptance, by an act drawn up. Normally, the acceptance of the bill of exchange is made by the drawee. In the case of refusal of acceptance from the drawee, in order to protect the interests of the holder of the bill of exchange, the law regulates the possibility for a person other than the drawee to accept the bill of exchange. Such an extraordinary acceptance avoids the initiation of the action for regress.
-
The new Criminal Code has introduced the imputability as essential feature of the offence. In the current meaning, imputability also includes guilt. Nevertheless, the legislator has mentioned also guilt as essential feature of the offence, together with imputability. The author analyzes to what extent the two essential features of the offence are complementary or exclude each other.
-
The momentary transformations taking place in the Republic of Moldova have as objective to adjust the national legislation to the international standards, in which the way of solving the co-relation between the interests of the person and the State’s interests is made at optimum level. Contradictoriality has a special importance on the whole part of the criminal procedure system, determining, in many directions, the weight of the legal status, the relations of opposition or collaboration between the participants in the criminal trial, as well as the legal relationships established between the participants in the trial and the court of law.
