În situația în care, pe perioada procesului de divorț între pãrinți, minora a fost încredințatã mamei prin hotãrâre judecãtoreascã, iar mama o influențeazã pe minorã sã refuze contactul cu tatãl ei și, în același timp, mama refuzã sã execute sentința judecãtoreascã prin care s-a stabilit programul de vizitare a minorei de cãtre tatã, instanța este în drept sã oblige pe ambii pãrinți sã se prezinte cu minora la centrul de consiliere (psihologicã) din cadrul direcției generale județene de asistențã socialã și protecția copilului (cu notã aprobativã).

Within the framework of study hereby, the institution of the Romanian President’s immunity under the Criminal Law is subject to review. Observing the constitutional legislator’s option, first there are set under review the material and temporal limits of the procedural immunity. In this context, there are put forth some novel problems such as summoning the President as a witness or the scope of immunity in the case of civil and tort liability. In relation to the substantive law immunity, it is reviewed the rationale of the institution, and then its substantive limits are detailed: the presidential powers are identified, i.e. there are brought to the attention some controversial assumptions such as granting and revoking the conditional pardon, or views expressed by the President in another frame than the official one.

Following the conclusion of the Arbitration Convention there are born a number of contractual relationships between all participants in such Convention, namely: the Arbitration Agreement (between litigants and arbitrators appointed by the same); the Arbitration Cooperation Agreement (in the case of Institutional Arbitration, between arbitrators and the permanent arbitration institution); the Agreement on the Organization of Arbitration (between the Parties and the Arbitration Institution). In the above study there are reviewed the legal issues of the three Agreements, subsequent to the conclusion of the Arbitration Convention mentioned above, namely: The Arbitrators’ Agreement, Drafting Arbitration Agreement and the Agreement on the Organization of Arbitration.

The study hereby was inspired by a recent Case where the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled upon a petition for a preliminary ruling covering the interpretation of the provisions of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of April 5th, 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts made under Article 234 EC (now Article 267 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union). Taking our stand upon the issues highlighted by the aforementioned case, namely the possibility of cancellation of an arbitration award by the Court of enforcement and implementation ex officio of the European Union Law by the national court, it should be laid down some clarifications relating, mainly, to the ECJ solution with reference to the principles of the European Union Law, as well as national issues regarding the subject of the enforcement act, the possibility to pursue an appeal against the arbitration award, the principle of availability governing the lawsuit, but also the res judicata of judgments. The authors critically analyze the judgment and bear in mind the relevant Romanian law (including the provisions of Law no. 134/2010 on the new Code of Civil Procedure), and the possible effects in national, arbitration or judicial jurisprudence.

The author performs a detailed analysis of the characteristic traits of indictments under the new Criminal Code which are correlated with, related to or in interdependence relationship, as appropriate, with fraud, in view of similarities and disparities thereof, with frequent references to valid national legal practice and in relation to the new Criminal provisions. To that effect, there are dealt with, in particular in the light of their disparities, offences such as: fraud in the insurance field, encouragement of the perpetrator, concealment, omission of the referral, misleading the legal authorities, blackmail, theft, breach of trust, breach of trust by defrauding the creditors, unfair assistance and representation, influence peddling, issuance of counterfeit securities, forgery of foreign securities, counterfeiting of a technical record, perjury, false identity, but also the ones laid down in Article 84 of Law no. 59/1934 on cheques and in Article 271 points 1 and 2 of the Company’s Law no. 31/1990. Thereafter, in the case of the offences mentioned above, there are considered differentially, as appropriate, the subject of criminal care, the offence, the objective and the subjective side, forms, procedures and penalties provided for under the law. Also, the author does not hesitate to put forward his opinion on deciphering the legal wording of the offences under review or the sphere, in practical situations, of one or the other of the aforementioned rules of incrimination and to advance some of its own solutions and ideas.

This article deals with an offence substantially amended under the new Criminal Code – i.e. the failure to comply with judgments. After a brief comparative presentation of new and old regulations, the author describes and analyzes the normative versions of the new wording: opposition to the execution, by making a stand against the enforcement authority; refusal of the enforcement authority to implement a judgment, by which it is bound to perform a certain act; refusal to assist the enforcement authority in the implementation of the judgment by people who are liable in this matter under the law; non-enforcement of judgment ordering the reinstatement of an employee; default in enforcing the judgment on the payment of wages within 15 days from the date of its enforcement application submitted to the employer by the interested Party; non-compliance of judgments on the establishment, payment, updating and recalculation of pensions; prevention of a person to use, in whole or in part, a property owned under a Court ruling, by the one against whom the same is enforceable.