The new regulation pertaining to business administration in the new Romanian Civil Code, much more detailed than the previous one, springs from the Civil Code of Québec. In Québec, the relevant legal framework provides for an original configuration of this source of obligations, imposing on it the condition of opportunity of the administration actions initiated by the administrator. Subject to this regulation are also the effects of inopportune administration, which aims at restoring the advantage brought to the person administered, without stating the legal grounds of such obligation, aspect which triggers questions to which this paper intends to answer, visiting, among others, other codification proposals on the law of obligations and relevant doctrine in this matter. At the same time, a theoretical definition is laid down for business administration, more nuanced than those elaborated after the new Romanian Civil Code has taken effect, definition which tends to be closer to the meaning of the new normative provisions.

This paper presents the meaning of the term „assets” in Article 535 of the Civil Code and, at the same time, highlights its incorrect use in some of the other texts of the Civil Code and other statutory instruments, in disagreement with the new terminological option. Likewise, it raises a discussion on the lack, within the Civil Code, of a minimum of general rules dedicated to „common assets”, irrespective of their nature, quality of holders and source of community. Finally, following the presentation of negative consequences of the reported shortcomings, some legal remedies are proposed.

The author analyses some specific features of the claim for compensation brought by private persons injured by unlawful administrative acts of authority or by public authorities’ refusal to solve claims concerning rights and legitimate interests of citizens. The claim for compensation has an accessory and subsidiary character in relation to the main claim for the annulment of the administrative act of authority, the repair of the damage being conditioned by the annulment of the act or by the obligation of the public authority to solve the claim of the private person. The study points out that the accessoriality relationship between the claim for compensation and the main claim bears consequences with regard to the jurisdiction of administrative courts.

Granting the potential contribution period for establishing the invalidity pension of persons classified within the 1st or 2nd invalidity degree who have lost their capacity to work due to common illnesses or accidents, not related to work, is currently conditioned by the obligation to complete a contribution period „in relation to age, provided in Table No 3” of the Law No 263/2010. The author considers that this provision, laid down in Article 76 (1) of the Law No 263/2010 on the unitary system of public pensions (as revised through Law No 37/2013), is unconstitutional as it is contrary to considerations made by the Constitutional Court in its Decision No 680/2012.

The article presents the characteristics of the civil action in criminal proceedings, points out the active and passive subjects of the legal action, and concludes that the civil liability insurer may not be obliged, in criminal proceedings, either jointly with the defendant or directly, to pay civil compensations to victims of road traffic accidents.