-
The author is dealing with the issues related to the postponement and interruption of the execution of penalty by imprisonment and by life detention according to the new Criminal Procedure Code. The study contains a comparative analysis of the new provisions and of the provisions in force both from the point of view of the doctrine, and of the jurisprudence in the field. -
Law No. 221/2009 regarding political convictions and their related administrative measures issued in the period comprised between March 6, 1945 – December 22, 1989 established, inter alia, that the victims of such convictions shall be entitled, within an interval of 3 years from the enforcement of this law (June 14, 2009) to request the Romanian State to pay moral damages (without any ceiling in terms of value) for the suffering caused by such convictions. The law was subsequently amended, in the sense that a ceiling was established for the value of such damages. In its first two decisions (No. 1358/2010 and No. 1360/2010), the Constitutional Court stated that both the original and the amended text of the law are unconstitutional, without denying, however, in principle, the fairness and lawfulness of granting such moral damages in the given situation. Until the present time, the Romanian State did not proceed to enact Law No. 221/2009, in consideration of the mentioned decisions issued by the Constitutional Court, although it was bound by the Constitution to proceed as such. Taking this situation into account, the author sets forth the idea that, at present, although we are apparently in the presence of a legislative void, the injured parties may claim, however, such damages in court, even at this time, on the strength of certain principles from the Constitution of Romania, from the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
-
The development of the legal framework for public procurement in the European Union represents a very important issue which presents numerous challenges. The starting point of the evolution of legal aspects in public procurement was the year of 1962, when the institutions of the European Community at that time underlined the importance of the regulation of this aspect for making the common market operational. In this respect, they militated for eliminating commercial restrictions inside the Community among the member states by making operational the freedom to establish and the free movement of services. Originally, public procurement represented a non-tariff barrier in the development of the common market, thus opening the way toward the harmonization of this field by the European Commission among its member states, including Romania. The previously mentioned legislative process was divided by the doctrine of the public procurement law in 4 stages which describe the evolution of public contracts for goods, works and services.
-
Sintagma „poate fi primit în profesie” folositã în art. 16 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 51/1995 privind organizarea și exercitarea profesiei de avocat conferã consiliilor barourilor – ca organe de conducere ale organizației profesionale – o competențã specialã, un drept de apreciere în legãturã cu primirea în profesie, cu scutire de examen, în cazul persoanelor enumerate limitativ de lege.
-
The following codes coexist at this moment in Romania: the Civil Procedure Code (issued in 1865, republished in 1948, subsequently supplemented and amended on numerous occasions), the Family Code (issued in 1954) and the Civil Code (issued in 1865), both of them were amended and supplemented by the new Civil Code and by the new Civil Procedure Code (published in 2009, respectively in 2010), but have not come into force yet. Under the circumstances, Law No. 202/2010 regarding certain measures to accelerate disputes resolution was enacted in October 2010; this law takes over a series of provisions from the new (civil and civil procedure) Codes. In this context, the author, by means of the above study, makes a thorough analysis of the impact of Law No. 202/2010 (mentioned hereinabove) on the notary procedures (regulated under Law No. 35/1995 regarding notaries public and notary activity, subsequently amended and supplemented in a successive manner) both at present, and from the perspective of the new (civil and civil procedure) Codes.
-
On the strength of Art. 322, item 4 of the current Romanian Civil Procedure Code, the review of a decision that remained final in the appeal court or through the fact that no appeal was submitted against it, as well as the review of a decision issued by a recourse court (when the merits of a case is invoked) may be requested, inter alia, also if “a judge, witness or expert who took part in the lawsuit received a final conviction for any crime regarding a case or if a decision was issued on the strength of a writ that was declared false during or after the lawsuit or if a magistrate received a disciplinary penalty for exercising his office in bad faith or with gross negligence in that case”. The author is discussing in this study the manner in which a civil court must proceed if, at present (for the reasons provided by the criminal law), the perpetration of the abovementioned crimes can no longer be ascertained under a criminal decision.
-
Fidejussion represents a form of personal guarantee, an accessory contract, particularized, in essence, by its purpose, commitment procedure and legal effects. When it comes to determining the identity and legal regime of fidejussion, there must be taken as a point of reference the triangular relation within which its three protagonists act: fidejussor, creditor and main debtor. The present work will be analyzing the conclusion and the effects of the fidejussion from the perspective of the Romanian Civil Code and the New Romanian Civil Code, with the purpose of establishing the elements of continuity and novelty brought by the new regulations.
-
In this study, the authors are analyzing the protection of the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship in the European competition law, on the one hand, from the perspective of the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, and, on the other hand, from the perspective of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the union regulations in the field. The authors are also referring to the Romanian legislation in the field, as well as to the latest trends in the doctrine and jurisprudence regarding the tackled issue.
-
Relatively recently brought under regulation by our law system, the models of utility are inventions with a lower level of complexity that are legally protected by means of the protection certificate released following a specific procedure. Encompassed in the study presented herein are precisely those judicial aspects of the formalities that need to be fulfilled when aiming at the release of the model of utility certificate of protection. Altogether, the author sets forth an original point of view regarding the approach and the systematisation of the internal and international formalities to be taken into account when dealing with the procedure of releasing the protection title for the models of utility, and also critically inspects the legal editing process, and the corelation between some legal provisions belonging to this field of interest and intereferring law-related notions, while laying down relevant de lege ferenda proposals in fulfilling the purpose of correction and defining with more clarity the legal provisions specific to this law branch.
-
In Romania, the Civil Procedure Code in force shall be repealed and replaced by the new Civil Procedure Code, which was published on July 15, 2010, but has not come into force yet (the time when it comes into force has not been legally established yet). Until such time, Law No. 202/2010 regarding certain measures to accelerate disputes resolution (The “Small Reform” Law) was enacted and came into force in October 2010. In this study, the author makes a comparative examination of the following issues: the exception of the lack of competence, competence conflicts and the transposition to the current Civil Procedure Code, by taking into consideration Law No. 202/2010 and, respectively, the new Civil Procedure Code. The author reaches the conclusion that, sometimes, in law, the regulations of the current Code are better than the regulations of Law No. 202/2010 or of the new Civil Procedure Code; also, there are contradictions between the new laws (Law No. 202/2010 and the new Civil Procedure Code). Given these facts, certain de lege ferenda proposals are laid down.
-
Government Emergency Ordinance No. 71/2009, serially amended and supplemented by Government Emergency Ordinances Nos. 18/2010 and 45/2010 established that Court decisions that became enforceable until December 31, 2009 and that concern salary rights to the benefit of the personnel from the budgetary sector shall be paid by budgetary authorities and institutions as follows: 34% in 2012; 33% in 2013; 33% in 2014, of the value of the enforceable title. The author considers that Government Emergency Ordinance No. 71/2009 (as amended and supplemented) does not infringe Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as the applicable jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.
-
This study is dedicated to the Special Part of the Criminal Procedure Code, in terms of the amendments brought by Law No. 202/2010, with reference to criminal prosecution, judgment on the merits, ordinary and extraordinary means of challenge, enforcement decisions or special judgment procedures. The study contains equally an analysis of the new regulations introduced in the field of recourse in the interest of the law. The text comments concerning the referral of the case to another Prosecutor’ Office, the information of the next hearing date, the judgment in case of admittance of guilt, the limits of the recourse judgment, the procedure in case of review can be indicated as examples. For an easier understanding of the study, the sequence of the analyzed legal regulations complies with both the structure of the Criminal Procedure Code, and with the chronology of the texts of the amending laws. Otherwise, given the fact that the work is especially addressing practitioners in criminal law and in criminal procedural law and given the fact that, for reasons of economy of the publishing space, the amended or amending texts were only rarely and partially reproduced, authors believe that the latter should be concomitantly available for a complete understanding of the study. With special reference to the contents of the second part of the study, emphasis needs to be placed on the fact that the work tried to highlight both the progressive and positively innovating provisions in the criminal procedure, and certain errors, non-compliances or legislative omissions or potential lack of correlation with the constitutional provisions. CUMPĂRĂ ACUM
