This article discusses the material and territorial jurisdiction for the settlement in the matter of land fund disputes. The material jurisdiction is examined in terms of art. 94 item 1. letter j), art. 94 items 3 and 4, Art. 95 item 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the special regulations contained in Law no. 18/1991, as republished, and the territorial jurisdiction of the perspective of art. 107 para. (1), art. 117 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the special law. The jurisdiction issue concerns the various actions on the land fund, arising from the enforcement of the Law no. 18/1991, as republished. The regulation of the jurisdiction of the actions settlement in the matter of the land fund, in favor of the same court, is proposed de lege ferenda.

The question of the public legal aid in civil matters was settled by the Government of Romania by issuing the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008 on legal aid in civil matters. However, the regulation issued in relation to public legal aid in civil matters fails to cover all situations that may arise in legal practice, one of the unregulated issues referring to the applications made by several people together, in which case the court fees stamp are due jointly.

This study examines the issue of dialogue between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the constitutional courts of the Member States of the European Union, with special reference to the Constitutional Court of Romania, and from this perspective, the effects of integration into the European Union and the transnational judicial dialogue they produce within the national legal systems.

Despite of the settling for several years in the Romanian legislation of the regulation giving the creditor the opportunity to regulate the enforcement of the debtor’s obligation, the holder of a trademark, in the manner of the legal seizure of the trademark directly from the estate of the latter – the provisions of art. 40 para. (2) of the Law no. 84/1998 on trademarks and geographical indications, the creditors completely ignore this option as they are not able to anticipate its multiple advantages. The legal seizure of a strong trademark known among consumers – the recipients of the goods or services which the trademark is associated to, confers the creditor seeking enforcement a true mean of enforcing the debtor in the voluntary and immediate execution of its duty. The latter is threatened with the loss of the right to use the trademark in its trade activity, a trademark that it had made famous in time with significant costs and making continuous effort. The manner in which the legislator intended to outline the text of art. 40 para. (2) of the Law no. 84/1998 suggests indirectly that the trademark rights can be enforced ut singuli, distinctly from the goodwill in which they are included, and the legal nature of the concept of trademark determine the means of enforcement whose procedures have to be followed in order to achieve the ultimate goal – recovery of the claim: the indirect. movable enforcement, by sale at auction of the trademark rights, after its evaluation by a judicial technical expert in the matter of the industrial property rights.

The development of the regulations in the matter of the consumer protection has contributed significantly to the reconstruction of traditional tort institution, providing a new focus on the fundamentals of such liability, by revaluing its functions and establishing a new coherence. The flaw in the product has been reported to the lack of security that a person can legitimately expect, given the circumstances of the presentation and use at the time of the product release. The breach of the security obligation entails the civil liability for damages to all persons who contributed to a defective product to be acquired by the consumer, from the manufacturer up to the distributor. Within these coordinates, in its study the authors examine the specificity of this civil obligation under the assumption of liability for defective products, in terms of European law regulations, and of the domestic law.

The author analyzes the legal status of undue payment, regarded as a source of civil obligations, such as they results in the texts of the new Civil Code. It has been specified since the beginning of the study that in general no essential amendments were reported in relation to the definition and existence conditions of this legal deed. However, it is noted as a novelty that the rules of undue payment in the new legislative environment apply also when the payment consists of the provision of services or execution of works. Likewise, the new Civil Code, unlike the old regulation, does not set forth anymore expressly the condition that the payment be made in error by solvents; however, the author argues, with convincing arguments, that the error of solvens is usually an actually relative prerequisite of the undue payment. A large space is given to the obligation to reimburse the undue payment and the rules applicable to it regarding the existence, the limits and its manner of execution. Most of these rules are located in a separate title of the Civil Code (Art. 1635 to 1649) and apply, with some exceptions, to all reimbursement obligations, regardless of their source. The author notes that, in their content, these rules contain many new elements compared to the old Civil Code, which tries and manages to examine carefully, formulating relevant solutions and answers.