-
Celebrating the Day of Justice is a good opportunity for the theoreticians and the practitioners of law to subject to reflection topics of a particular interest, legislative and jurisprudential solutions, or de lege ferenda aspects. Such an event also enables the evaluation of the institutional relations between the authorities that have a well-defined constitutional role in exercising the judicial authority, as well as of the contribution of the different legal professions to the general and complex law enforcement process. From this perspective, the author emphasizes not only the importance of the celebration reunion of the representatives of the main institutions and professional organizations of jurists, but also the requirement for such an event to be marked by scientific manifestations, in which the participants to make known their own researches in the field, to debate in a spirit of fellowship and solidarity issues facing justice as a public service, the statute of magistrates, as well as of the other legal professions. In a way, every man of law is responsible for the triumph of the idea of justice in his profession. -
The concept of material error is evoked in two texts of the Civil Procedure Code, respectively in Article 442 and in Article 503 (2) point 2. For the purposes of Article 442 of the Civil Procedure Code, according to the opinion unanimously accepted by the doctrine and by the case law, material error is the mistake slipped in the contents of the judgment, at the time of drafting, which does not affect the foundation or the legality of the solution pronounced by the court. The correction of such material errors is made according to a special procedure regulated by law, which has as its finality the correction of such errors slipped, at the time of drafting, within the minutes, the preambles, the recitals, or even within the operative part of a judgment, which may be a sentence, a decision or a minutes of the session. This category of material errors includes those related to: the name, quality and oral submissions of the parties, those of calculation, etc. The legal meaning of the concept of material error, within the meaning of Article 503 (2) point 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, is sensitively different from that attributed to this concept by Article 442 of the Civil Procedure Code. From this perspective, the material error is any essential and involuntary omission in relation to the situation existing in the file at the time when the court of recourse delivers the judgment. In other terms, the obvious material error concerns formal aspects of the recourse which had as consequence the wrongful settlement of this legal remedy. It is about that mistake made by the court by confusing some important elements or some material data and which determines the solution delivered. The doctrine defines the judicial error as the error of judgment committed by judges or by prosecutors in the course of conducting a judicial procedure. This error may be of law or of fact and in any system of law such an error stands as basis for exercising of the ordinary or extraordinary legal remedies.
-
The legal report between the commercial company and the administrator is a report of mandate. The administrator mandate can be with representation or without representation and has contractual content and also legal one. The powers of the administrator of the company include two elements: the power to fulfil management abilities; the power to represent if it was expressly granted. The power to represent is distinct from the power of administration and exists only if it has been conferred. The representation of the company by the administrator is exercised differently depending on the type of company. For concluding the dispositions, the company’s administrator does not need a special power of attorney in the authentic form for this purpose. When the acts concluded by the representatives of the company are done with the overcoming of its object, they are the duty of the company except in the cases when the third parties knew or should have known the overcoming of the object or when the acts of the same are concluded by exceeding the limits of the powers of the respective bodies.
-
One of the extraordinary legal remedies regulated by the Civil Procedure Code is the contestation for annulment. According to Article 503 (2) point 2 and (3) of the Civil Procedure Code, the judgments of the courts of recourse, as well as those of the courts of appeal, may be challenged with a contestation for annulment where the settlement given to that legal remedy is the result of a material error. Besides the phrase „material error”, used in other texts as well, the phrase „material mistake” or the phrase „material mistakes” can also be found in the Code. Thus we appreciate that the legislator was not consistent with the terminology mentioned. It uses the very same phrase, in different contexts and with different meanings, which creates confusions in the interpretation and application of the legal texts. For the lexical and semantic consideration of the phrase „material error”, included in Article 503 (2) point 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, and of the methods of interpretation of the legal rules, it can be concluded that this phrase can not be reduced only to certain procedural errors, but it could also enable the correction of the errors of judgment.
-
This study analyzes the particularities involved by the powers of the Court of Accounts to establish contraventions and to apply offences punishable in the specific activity of control/audit they achieve. Two categories of offences can be identified, namely contraventions that the Court of Accounts only finds, not having the power to apply sanctions against them, and contraventions for which the Court of Accounts is competent not only to identify them but also to apply the sanctions for them. The rules on contraventions that may be applicable to deviations discovered by the Court of Accounts can be found in the Law on the organization and functioning of the Court of Accounts No 94/1992, as well as in other special regulations that are analyzed in this article. The approach is carried out not only from a legislative and doctrinal perspective, but also from a case law perspective, being exemplified in some solutions given by the courts in cases concerning complaints against the contravention reports drawn up by the Court of Accounts. Finally, some conclusions are presented, which also include the authors’ point of view on the perspective approach, including by the legislator, of this issue.
-
This study has as object the incidental regulations in the matter of illegal border crossings and of asylum, as well as how they intersect, and it intends to find an adequate solution for what happens with the criminal prosecution, in the cases of fraudulent crossings of the state border, in the course of solving the application for being granted a form of protection submitted by the person who has illegally crossed the border. It is proposed the intervention of the legislator in the sense of introducing a rule which provides as cause of suspension of the criminal prosecution the situation where the person wanted for the fraudulent crossing of the state border has subsequently submitted an application for being granted a form of protection and is subject to the asylum procedure. The need for such intervention is motivated by the ineffectiveness of continuing the criminal prosecution and of the settlement of the case provided that, at the end of the asylum procedure, the person concerned can be granted a form of protection from among those recognized by the Law No 122/2006, the cause of non-punishment provided in Article 11 of this law being thus incidental.
-
In the situation that a person has been sanctioned by an administrative authority for committing a contravention, this person can no longer be subsequently prosecuted for the same deed contemplated in its materiality, whereas, in this situation it is applicable the ne bis in idem principle which determines, from the perspective of the criminal procedural law, the incidence of the case provided by Article 16 (1) i) of the Criminal Procedure Code, with reference to the authority of res judicata, which prevents the exercise of the criminal action against that person.
-
The authors plead for the distinct regulation of the manifestly illegal acts and measures showing that their legal treatment requires operative sanctions and their removal in due time having regard to their implications for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Taking into account the implications increased by the latest changes of the institution of the initiation and continuation of the criminal prosecution there are pointed out some inconsistencies of the criminal processual legislation with the provisions of the Constitution and of the European Convention of Human Rights, expressing some criticism of unconstitutionality. Thus they criticize the obligativity to initiate criminal prosecution „in rem” even when the authors are indicated or known, and make some „de lege ferenda” proposals, for the concordance of Article 304 (2), Article 305 (1), (2) and (3) and Article 339 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Code with the provisions of the Constitution.
-
Both in the Member States and at European and international level there are currently concerns for finding the best means of combating tax fraud and tax evasion. Recent measures place the good tax governance among the means of fighting against this phenomenon, and it is estimated that joint actions at European level are more effective, being meant to encourage also third countries to apply minimum standards of good tax governance. At the same time, the concept of good tax governance, as well as those of tax fraud and tax evasion are taken under consideration by the doctrinaires in the field of criminal and tax law, but the definitions given to them have been imprecise and sometimes contradictory. In this context, we intend to emphasize the contribution of good tax governance as an effective means to prevent and mitigate tax fraud and tax evasion both at national, European and international level.
-
The study shows that Article 291 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with the marginal name „Referrals made by persons in management positions and by other persons”, provides a sui generis way of referral to the criminal prosecution bodies, separately from the complaint, denunciation and ex officio referral. It is appreciated that the text establishes an obligation to refer the matter to the criminal prosecution body, particularised by subject and object. The subject of this obligation is, among others, any person who exercises a service of public interest for which he has been entrusted by the public authorities. This description corresponds to the notion of civil servant, within the meaning of Article 175 (2) of the Criminal Code. The judge pertains to this category, by the fact that he exercises a service of public interest and by the fact that he has been entrusted by the public authorities to exercise it. Consequently, it is shown that subject of the obligation to refer the matter to the criminal prosecution body is an offence about the commission of which the judge has become aware in the exercise of his duties. The article also notes that Article 346 (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory for the preliminary chamber judge, but the extent of this obligation is limited by the need to comply with Article 354 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Thus: as a rule, the preliminary chamber judge who ordered the commencement of the trial has the obligation to join the composition of the judicial panel that exercises the judicial function; by way of exception, if the preliminary chamber judge that has ordered the commencement of the trial is prevented by an objective cause from joining the composition of the judicial panel, he may be replaced with another judge. The sanction of the violation of Article 346 (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code is the absolute nullity arising from the non-observance of the rules regarding the composition of the judicial panel. It is appreciated that absolute nullity is incidental, since Article 346 (7) of the Criminal Procedure Code is violated, in two hypotheses: the preliminary chamber judge who has ordered the commencement of the trial is not also the judge who exercises the judicial function, and this is not caused by any impediment; the preliminary chamber judge who ordered the commencement of the trial is not also the judge who exercises the judicial function, and this is caused by a non-objective impediment.
-
The article proposes a discussion about the institution of the putative deed. Considering the fact that this institution does not know an explicit legal regulation, it gave rise to heated discussions in the specialized legal literature, which had not only a theoretical importance, but also a great practical importance. In the beginning of the presentation it is shown what is the correct name of this institution of criminal law, from the author’s perspective, arguing at the same time the opinion to which he understands to rally. It is shown that the putative deed corresponds to an inverse error either of law or of fact. Given that, in a first hypothesis, the author considers that the deed committed is incriminated by a rule of criminal nature, although in reality such an activity is not incriminated or, in another hypothesis, although the author’s deed is incriminated by the criminal law, the actual manner of committing the deed does not fall within the respective legal text. Similarly, it is also presented perhaps the most heated discussion in the legal literature, namely the one in which the author executes certain acts of execution with the intention of killing a person, not knowing that he had died prior to the moment of beginning the activity. It is shown that, given the legal reality in our country, at this time, the perpetrator has to be held liable for committing a putative deed, not an attempt, whether a punishable or non-punishable attempt is discussed. At the same time, it is stated that the judicial practice has retained the commission of a putative deed, and not of an offence, in the hypothesis that it is required a qualified active subject for committing a certain offence and the person who committed the deed did not act in this capacity. In the author’s opinion, in such a hypothesis, it will not be retained the commission of any offence, but only the commission of a putative deed, only in the situation that the deed committed does not represent another offence. At the end of the article conclusions are drawn, also showing how the legislator could intervene in order to put an end to the discussions arisen in the legal literature and, at the same time, in order to enable possibly the sanctioning of the persons who commit putative deeds which pose a high social danger.
-
The reasons behind our research are justified by the numerous legal acts of the European Union adopted in the most diverse areas, acts which include an unprecedented development of substantive EU law, particularly during the last period (2000–2017). As a consequence, the situations in which the infringement procedure can be initiated are also exponentially multiplied. An in-depth analysis of the subject can be edifying if we make a quantitative comparison, and not only, of the EU acquis, existing in the ’60s, at the beginning of the Community construction, compared to the present, already 60 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, which have led to the adoption of a highly derivative legislation within a Union of 28 Member States. Regarding the infringement procedure, for doctrinaires, but especially for practitioners, we will analyze the following outstanding issues: who can trigger the procedure; against whom the procedure may be triggered; the situations and methods for initiating the procedure and the steps taken. All these aspects are presented taking into consideration the quality of Romania as a Member State of the European Union with full rights and obligations.
