In the study hereby, the author makes a comparative analysis of regulations covering negative prescription under the current Civil Code (Law No. 287/2009, republished on July 15th, 2011 and effective since October 1st, 2011) as compared to the previous legal regulations (in particular, Decree No. 167/1958 on negative prescription). At the end of this comparative analysis, the author concludes that the relevant regulation covering negative prescription is manifestly superior under the current Civil Code, as compared to Decree No. 167/1958.

The regulation by the new Civil Code of the patrimonies by appropriation came as a necessity given the economic development of our society. The existence of the patrimony by appropriation was equally recognized by the former legislation, by way of specific provisions regarding the carrying out of certain liberal professions or economic activities. This paper is aimed at analysing specific aspects of the patrimonies by appropriation from the perspective of the liberal individual professional patrimony, as a patrimonial mass distinctively regulated by the new codification. The exercise of the authorized liberal professionals implies the existence of a professional patrimony that ensures the carrying out of activities that do not have an economic character. The formal recognition of the “self-employed” as a subject of tax law bearing specific tax liabilities, distinct from those incurred by this same person concerning his personal patrimony, could create the appearance of a “two-headed monster”, of two or more persons in one, of a person who is multiplying according to the number of patrimonies by appropriation that he holds. In fact, the possibility for an individual to carry out economic activities or liberal professions without setting up, to that effect, a legal entity with its own patrimony, does not require the use of the legal fiction of multiplying the person according to the needed number of patrimonies, as the modern doctrine concering the patrimony accepts both the uniqueness and the division of the patrimony into patrimonial masses and patrimonies by appropriation.

Under the study hereby, the author sets under review the institution of “recidivism” in the light of the new Criminal Code. Essentially, highlighting new issues both in relation to the definition and the terms of recidivism, and as regards punishment. Therefore, the terms of recidivism have been amended (limits thereof have been extended), and the sanctioning treatment was simplified. Also, the author notes the fact that the legislature does not make a distinction, in terms of conditions, between post-release recidivism and the post-sentencing recidivism, nor between low recidivism and high recidivism, the old rules being grouped in a single way.

The accession of Romania to the European Union on January 1st, 2007 also involved the need for harmonization of national legislation with the European one, which, inter alia, led to the elaboration of a new Criminal Code. This regulation covers some new elements, including the crime of harm to the unborn child, as provided for in Article 202 under the new Criminal Code, as an integral part of Title I of the Special Part dedicated to crime against the person. As stated in the Explanatory Memorandum to the new Criminal Code, by criminalizing such acts it was intended to cover a legal vacuum, i.e. to protect the fetus from the moment of the commencement of the delivery process until completion thereof. In the study hereby, the author examines from the criminal doctrine perspective, but also in terms of medical science, the meaning of the term fetus and the phrases “during childbirth” and “during pregnancy”, advancing some de lege ferenda proposals.

In the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the issue of a broad interpretation of the right to marriage is all the more acutely debated, while the Court is beset with applications filed by homosexual and transgender individuals to have this right recognized. In the current state of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the marriage of a couple in which one of the partners has resorted to a sexual Convention through gender reassignment surgery is considered legitimate (within the meaning of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), stating that this is also a case of heterosexual marriage. However, so far, the European Court of Human Rights has not considered legitimate marriages between persons of the same biological sex (gay or lesbian).

Taking our stand upon the differing regulations under Article 283 and Article 315 of Law No. 1/2011 on National Education (texts according to which, as far as the pre-university teaching staff is concerned, recovery of damages to the employing unit in consequence of patrimonial liability takes place based on a charging decision, while, as far as the higher education teaching staff is concerned, the recovery in question takes place according to the labour law, so, as a rule, by way of the employer’s proceedings before the Labour Court of jurisdiction), the author makes a series of critical approaches (pointing out that this distinction in the procedure is not justified) and, concurrently, puts forward de lege ferenda proposals.