-
În spațiul public românesc din ultimii patru ani, discuțiile referitoare la revizuirea Constituției au devenit atât de uzuale, încât riscă să bagatelizeze nu doar ideea de revizuire a Constituției, ci chiar conceptul de lege fundamentală. În marea lor majoritate, dezbaterile publice referitoare la necesitatea modificării Constituției au stat sub semnul unor viziuni personale și personalizate cu privire la rolul instituțiilor fundamentale ale statului. Cel mai adesea, opțiunile formulate de maniera cea mai vocală au avut ca punct de pornire situațiile conflictuale în care au fost implicate diferite autorități publice. În sine, această abordare, eminamente din perspectivă conflictuală, deși utilă și poate chiar necesară, este incompletă și insuficientă. -
Este în afara oricărei îndoieli că tradiționala clasificare a constituțiilor în constituții rigide și în constituții suple rămâne o teză unanim admisă de către constituționaliști. Cei care critică această clasificare o fac fie din ignoranță (și aici replicile sunt inutile), fie din motive pur electorale, mai mult sau mai puțin motivate. Pentru liniștea sufletească a acestora din urmă, trebuie să se observe că doctrina constituțională explică foarte clar faptul că rigiditatea unei constituții nu se opune revizuirii sale. Rigiditatea constituțională este de fapt un procedeu tehnic (constituțional) care se legitimează prin stabilitatea în timp a constituției, ca trăsătură definitorie a acesteia. Iar stabilitatea constituției se fondează, la rândul său, pe realitatea că o constituție este o reformă, este cea mai complexă reformă, a cărei exprimare cere timp și, de ce să nu o spunem, răbdare.
-
Întrebarea pe care ne-o punem cu toții este cum să construim o societate a bunăstării, în care să domnească cel puțin o bună înțelegere și toleranța, o societate non-agresivă, dacă o societate consensuală nu este posibilă. Răspunsul ar putea fi preferința pentru dialog; deci este necesară crearea de instituții și proceduri care prin mijloace juridice să asigure consolidarea democrației. Revizuirea Constituției este o importantă pârghie pentru a se atinge acest scop. Buna guvernare și consolidarea statului de drept se pot obține prin amplificarea rolului dreptului în sistemul politic statal, astfel încât democrația și o participare publică reală la formularea și adoptarea actelor normative secundare și chiar terțiare să fie consacrate prin norme juridice constituționale.
-
Pentru motivele pe care le vom detalia în continuare, ne vom pronunța de la început în legătură cu problemele anunțate în titlu și vom afirma că este necesară revizuirea Constituției, dar, deocamdată, nu este oportună. Este necesară deoarece exercitarea puterii politico-etatice pe baza Constituției, pe parcursul a mai bine de 22 de ani, a întâmpinat dificultăți determinate de modul laconic sau deficitar de reglementare care, la rândul său, a condus la interpretarea diferită, uneori contrară, a unor reguli constituționale de către principalii actori politici, de contradicția dintre unele texte constituționale, de lipsa existenței unor principii clar formulate privind organizarea și exercitarea puterii politice, de căderea în desuetudine a unor reguli sau principii juridice înscrise în legea fundamentală, de caracterul confuz al unor reglementări, de integrarea României în Uniunea Europeană și consecințele acestui fapt pe planul exercitării puterii etc.
-
Unlike the previous Civil Procedure Code, the current (Romanian) Civil Procedure Code regulates (as an exception from the rule of uniqueness of the judicial remedies of a judgment) the admissibility, in some situations, of filing an appeal ex novo during the judgment of an appeal ex novo, respectively, of filing the appeal on law during the judgment of an appeal on law. This study examines analytically this new conception and regulation of the current Civil Procedure Code (Law No 134/2009, republished), the author positively appreciating the new regulation in question.
-
The author of the study critically refers to the contradictory opinions expressed in the doctrine with regard to the scope of companies covered by Article 1931 of the new Civil Code, a text which regulates the tacit extension of the duration of the company contract. Noting that, according to an opinion, the text is applicable not only to the simple company, but also to all companies with legal personality regulated by the Law No 31/1990 on companies, and, according to another opinion, it is applicable only to the simple company, the author advocates and argues his own opinion. According to the author’s opinion, the tacit extension of the duration of the company may occur in case of simple company (without legal personality), regulated by the new Civil Code, but also in cases of stock company and company limited by shares (companies with legal personality), regulated by the Law No 31/1990 (a special law in relation to the new Civil Code). On the contrary, the author considers that the text of Article 1931 of the new Civil Code is incompatible with the legal regime of the general partnership, of the company limited by shares and of the limited liability company (companies with legal personality regulated by the same special law), because, otherwise, the legal rule by which it is recognized to the personal creditors of the associates in these companies the right to opposition to the extension of the duration of the legal person would be eluded.
-
This study aims to briefly analyze the promise of sale with the three forms in which the promise is objectified: unilateral promise, bilateral promise, option pact. In the opinion of the author, the versions of the promise are separate legal entities, all preceeding the final contract, which can be regarded as preparatory stages of the final contract, in the process of its progressive elaboration. In the view of the Romanian legislator, but also of the dominant doctrine, the unilateral promise is essentially different from the option pact, contrary to the French doctrine and to a part of the Romanian doctrine. In the enforcement of the promise the author appreciates that the pronouncing of a judgment, which replaces the contract, is a way of exception of the enforcement in kind, not being possible for the court to substitute for the lack of consent for the final conclusion of the contract expressed in the form provided by law for the final act, of any of the parties. Therefore, in essence, the principle of contractual freedom shall prevail over the principle of its binding force.
-
For the first time in the Romanian legislation, the new Civil Code (Article 1368) expressly regulates the subsidiary obligation to reimburse the victim, in the sense that „lack of discernment does not exempt the author of the damage from paying a reimbursement to the victim whenever the liability of the person who, according to the law, had the duty to supervise such person can not be engaged” (the author of the damage). In this study there are successively examined: aspects of comparative law in the matter; the position of the Romanian doctrine and of the case-law on the issue in question; the quality of the liable person [for the purpose of Article 1368 (1) of the Civil Code]; the tort civil liability of the person who lacks discernment; the legal basis of the subsidiary liability of the person who lacks discernment; final de lege ferenda proposals in order to improve Article 1368 (1) of the Civil Code.
-
This article makes an analysis of the institution of putative marriage regulated by the provisions of Article 304 of the Civil Code which establishes an important derogation from the principle quod nullum est, nullum producit effectum. Therefore, there are raised for discussion the conditions of existence of the putative marriage and there are presented the effects of its nullity in the relationships between the former spouses, making distinction between the situation where both spouses acted in good faith upon the conclusion of the marriage and the situation in which only one of them acted in good faith, as well as in the relationships between parents and their children. The final part is devoted to the conclusions drawn from this study.
-
According to Article 247 of the Law No 187/2012 for the implementation of the Law No 286/2009, the Criminal Code entered into force on 1 February 2014. The new Criminal Code provides four articles for the regulation of the application of the criminal law in time: Article 3 refers to the principle of the activity of the criminal law, Article 4 regulates the retroactivity of the criminal law of decriminalization, Article 5 is devoted to the application of the most favourable criminal law before the final judgment of the case, Article 6 concerns the application of the most favourable criminal law after the final judgment of the case, and Article 7 is reserved to the application in time of the temporary criminal law. Throughout this study the author presents and explains the new criminal rules regulating the application in time of criminal law.
-
The radical reformation of the criminal proceedings meant also the establishment of new legal institutions. One of them is the preliminary chamber, inspired by the Anglo-Saxon law systems, and by the continental law system. Conceived as a distinct phase of criminal proceedings, the preliminary verification raises real problems of constitutionality, being unable to fit into the mechanism of the judicial bodies stated in the Fundamental Law. In so far as it takes over functions of the judges and it excludes from debates the main subjects of criminal proceedings, it is also contrary to the requirements of the ECHR on the principles of equality of arms and equity.
-
This study analyzes the new structure of the judgment based on the guilty plea, describes the conditions of application of this simplified procedure in comparison with the previous regulation, the rules of conduct of the special judicial investigation, the solutions which can be issued by courts in order to solve the criminal action, all these by emphasizing the advantages or shortcomings of the new institution.
