-
Through this study we have made a thorough analysis of the conditions of admissibility of the special cancellation (revocation) action regulated by the provisions of Article 117 of the Law No 85/2014 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and of insolvency, as well as an analysis of the possibility of cancelling (revoking) any fraudulent act concluded by the debtor in the 2 years prior to the opening of the insolvency procedure. Likewise, we have analyzed what operations concluded, in the two years prior to the opening of the procedure, with the persons who have legal relationships with the debtor may be cancelled and the benefits recovered, if they are to the detriment of the creditors, except for the acts concluded in good faith in the execution of an agreement with the creditors, concluded as a result of extrajudicial negotiations for restructuring the debtor’s debts. -
Through this study we have made a thorough analysis of the conditions of admissibility of the special cancellation (revocation) action regulated by the provisions of Article 117 of the Law No 85/2014 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and of insolvency, as well as an analysis of the possibility of cancelling (revoking) any fraudulent act concluded by the debtor in the 2 years prior to the opening of the insolvency procedure. Likewise, we have analyzed what operations concluded, in the two years prior to the opening of the procedure, with the persons who have legal relationships with the debtor may be cancelled and the benefits recovered, if they are to the detriment of the creditors, except for the acts concluded in good faith in the execution of an agreement with the creditors, concluded as a result of extrajudicial negotiations for restructuring the debtor’s debts
-
This article presents the procedural features of the principle non reformatio in pejus in civil procedural area. It aims to concentrate the main theoretical and practical concepts exposed during the time, relating to the limits of this principle. Finally, the study is dedicated to analyze the real interference between different peremptory rules, which govern the appeal, and the principle analyzed.
-
The retransmission of the right to successoral option raises some difficulties of theoretical understanding and practical application, at least for the following reasons: the Civil Code, now in force, substantially changes the logic of the previous regulation of this legal institution; in practice, there are being debated, with a significant frequency, inheritances opened before 1 October 2011 (the moment when the current Civil Code entered into force) and which consequently fall under the incidence of the provisions of the former Civil Code (which ultractivates); there are encountered, in practice more frequently, several inheritances in respect of which the right to successoral option has been successively retransmitted; the institution about whose issues we are concerned herein, in particular, have some resemblances to the successoral representation and to the retransmission of the inheritance. For all these reasons, and we believe that there are not few, nor the only ones, we will discuss further the retransmission of the right to successoral option, starting from the theoretical aspects, which are indispensable for its just understanding and for its proper application in practice. In this context, we will give concrete examples, with the hope that they will be of use to theoreticians and, in particular, to practitioners in the field of successions.
-
The study aims to present a case solved by German courts. It was raised the issue of the legal qualification of the winning under a beer cap, on terms of several people having put together the money for purchasing two boxes of beer and having bought them for that amount, including the bottle with the cap which contained the prize. In the case briefly presented it was necessary to determine whether the winning belongs only to the person who discovered the prize under the cap or to all the persons who have contributed with money to purchase the bottle containing the winning cap.
-
For the appeal, which generates, in principle, a new judgment on the merits, given also the finality of exercising the appeal – the nullity of the judgment challenged – it is required another approach to the cases of nullity different than the traditional one in the matter of procedural acts. For the situation of referral of the case for retrial, it is required to argue that it is necessary to specify, in the judgment of referral, where appropriate, the part which is cancelled from the procedure followed by the court of first instance, respectively of the procedural act from which the retrial begins.
-
The neutral power, i.e. a power that is situated outside the three powers derived from the organisation of the state on the basis of the principle of separation of powers, was conceived and institutionalised in various ways. One of them transforms the Head of State into a power that distances itself from political games and the separation of powers. The Head of State plays the role of balancing power and that of mediator between legislative, executive and jurisdictional powers and between state and society. The following article examines the role of the Head of State as neutral power in the constitutional history of Romania and in the 1991 Constitution.
-
The interpretative solution provided by the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Panel for the settlement of some matters of criminal law by the operative part of the Decision No 15/2018, according to which „after the transfer of the person convicted by the foreign judicial authorities, in order to continue the execution of the punishment in Romania, the length of the punishment considered by the state of conviction as executed on the basis of the performed work and of good conduct, granted as benefit in favour of the convicted person, by the foreign judicial authority, must not be deducted from the punishment which is executed in Romania”, has lost its validity and binding effect both as a result of delivery of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union – Grand Chamber of 8 November 2016 in the Case C-554/14 and as a result of the entry into force of the amendments brought to the provisions of Article 144 (1) of the Law No 302/2004 by the Law No 236/2017.
-
Recognition of the adherence of leniency to the legal phenomenon or its inclusion in the extrajuridical field is determined by the nature of philosophicalmaterialist or idealist conceptions. Amnesty and pardon are based on the socio-political grounds and have as foundation the feelings of gentleness, magnanimity, compassion. Justice is the ideal state of society, achievable by ensuring, for each separately and for everyone together, the enjoyment of legitimate rights and interests. The fundamental components or values of the notion of justice are: righteousness, social utility, legal certainty. The concept of leniency is related to all the three elements. By its very name, its functions and its purpose, the law must be based on the idea of righteousness. The essence of the idea of righteousness is to treat similar cases equally and different cases in distinct ways. The exercise of leniency is closely related to the principle of justice. Social utility means to organize a community to ensure the good of everyone and of each separately. The same social utility claiming punishment sometimes justifies the abandonment of punishment or forgiveness thereof. Legal security designates that state of safety of individuals and of society as conferred by the legal normativity by complying with its prescriptions. Although it is sometimes considered that leniency means bankruptcy in criminal justice, the legal certainty will never be affected if leniency acts are consistent with a rational legal conscience and does not harm the rights of the injured parties by committing the offence. Amnesty and pardon are not directed against legal certainty, but, on the contrary, they are put to the service of the common good, which is a proof of trust and a means of protecting the citizens. The three components of the idea of justice – righteousness, social utility and legal certainty – are in a tensed state. Amnesty and pardon are called to detension and harmonize these relations. Leniency is not in antithesis with the law, but it is inevitable for its completion.
-
In our previous study we have analyzed cybercrime in the Cloud Computing environment. Our research led us to the conclusion that, with the rise of Cloud Computing services, cybercriminals benefit of new and improved ways of conducting their illicit activity, thus using the Cloud environment as an instrument or as a specific target. Furthermore, we have discovered that cybercrime is constantly changing. Emerging technology trends like Big Data, Social Networks, the Internet of Things and Cloud Computing services change the way that cybercriminals act today. As more and more relevant data is located in the Cloud, the cybercrime threat also increases. Cloud Computing also offers immense computing power at the disposal of nearly anyone, criminals included. This leads to the migration phenomenon of cybercrime. Traditional forms of cybercrime are gradually replaced by new and more complex ones, like those that occur in Cloud Computing and in other information technology environments. Our study shows that there are a series of factors that are held responsible for the cybercrime migration phenomenon. These factors include: powerful processing power, huge volumes of valuable data, extended service availability, risk of mass attacks, vanishing fingerprints, adaptable crime tools and others. Only by examining the way that cybercrime evolves we will be able to reduce its harmful effects.
-
Cititorii Dreptului au luat cunoștință de proiectul de lege relativ la noua modificare a legii Curții de Casație, în scopul reînființării recursului direct în materie de contencios administrativ, în expunerea de motive a d-lui M. Cantacuzino, ministrul justiției, ce am distribuit în supliment. Publicăm aici și raportul d-lui Petre Missir, care este un document luminos asupra legii propuse, aflată în discuția Senatului.
-
Publicăm mai jos hotărârea Tribunalului Ilfov, dată în procesul dintre Societatea tramvaiurilor și Ministerul de interne, cu prilejul aplicărei legei din 18 Decembrie 1911, și anume părerea motivată a majorităței (d-nii N. Algiu, președinte, și C. Bossie, judecător) și aceea a d-lui judecător I. G. Manu.
