Conform art. 4251 alin. (1) C.pr.pen., calea de atac a contestației se poate exercita numai atunci când legea o prevede expres. Cu toate că dispozițiile art. 278 C.pr.pen. care constituie sediul materiei îndreptării erorilor materiale nu prevăd posibilitatea atacării încheierii cu cale de atac separată, sunt incidente dispozițiile art. 442 și 446 C.pr.civ. prin mijlocirea art. 2 alin. (2) din același act normativ, Codul de procedură civilă, prin generala sa aplicabilitate, reprezentând dreptul comun și în materie procesual penală. Drept urmare, atâta vreme cât legea procesual penală nu interzice expres posibilitatea atacării încheierilor de îndreptare a erorilor materiale pe cale separată, se poate apela la dispozițiile legii procesual civile care reglementează această posibilitate (cu notă critică).

Today the philosophy of law can not be conceived outside the genesis, evolutions, paradigmatic hypostases, connections with the science, the knowledge and the world, of the fundamental conceptual couple philosophy – right. In the contemporary world we are witnessing spectacular changes of paradigm, of models, from the mechanical understanding of the legal order – specific to the modern period – to law as a complexity of high organization, open to others, to totality and to meaning. This means, among other things, the inherence of the philosophical dimension of the law. Therefore, the philosophy of law shall be established as a polycentric, integrative concept connecting together the durable classic axle, namely philosophy (expressed through excellence by its exemplary paradigms) – law (also expressed by its representative paradigms), to the contemporary network of knowledge, to the global society and to the contemporary man, in a specific, critical, open manner, always evolving.

In this article there are examined comparatively the time limit and the grounds for appeal provided in the current legislation and the previous legislation, as well as the regulation in force. Likewise, within this paper there have been formulated a series of critical remarks, as well as de lege ferenda proposals, which have in view the amendment of the provisions of Article 410 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The paper can be useful for the academic environment, for the practitioners, as well as for the legislator.

After the author has analyzed in a previous study the need to take into account the legitimate defence in the field of cybercrime and has emphasized the aspects of the conditions of the attack, in this material there are analyzed the legitimate retaliation and the state of necessity. In this context, the author has tried to emphasize the problems that may arise in relation to the conditions relating to defence (legitimate retaliation), also seeking to provide a theoretical framework capable of providing applicability to the institution of self-defence. An important aspect analyzed in this paper has been the putative self-defence, which could be a key aspect in the discussion on the legitimate retaliation. Equally, it has been examined inclusively the institution of the state of necessity, also drawing conclusions on the relationship between this institution and the institution of self-defence.

In this paper the author examines the legal regime of the plea of illegality regulated by Article 4 of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004, as this text has been rather recently amended by Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of Law No 134/2010 on the [new] Civil Procedure Code. In this regard there are examined: the definition and the legal nature of the plea of illegality, its features, as well as the conditions of admissibility of the plea of illegality.

Currently, under the increasingly intense and diverse interactions between countries, due to the unprecedented mobility of individuals, in space, or to the dynamics of public international law, as such, (for example, in international human rights or international criminal law) the theoretical model that governs the relationship between international law and domestic law has become a topical one. In addition, the existence of several supra-state forms of cooperation, such as the European Union, bring into question the relationship that is being established, on the one hand, between the law of those forms of cooperation and the Member States' national law and, on the other hand, between the former and general international law. In this paper I will discuss the relationship between international law and Romanian domestic law, as regulated by Romania’s organic and constitutional provisions and taking due account of Romania’s EU membership. The paper is structured in three sections corresponding to the general theoretical approaches to the matter (Section II), the legal, institutional and scholars’ approaches (Section III) and conclusions and de lege ferenda proposals; the latter will address both the content of the regulations, as well as some aspects of legislative technique (Section IV).