-
This study first analyzes the amendments brought to the offence provided in Article 141 of the Law No 8/1996 by the Law No 187/2012. The author emphasizes the non-correlations of the incrimination with the moral copyrights which it protects, as well as the lack of clear and precise wordings, which should exclude any ambiguity in the drafting of the incriminating rules. The analysis of the offence provided in the special law is connected to the provisions in the matter contained in the Criminal Code, as well as to the doctrinaire opinions expressed in the field. The critical remarks expressed by the author concerning the meaning of legal rules are intended to be impulses addressed to the legislator to correct the drafting of texts, in order to achieve the desideratum of compliance with the requirements of accessibility and foreseeability of the law for its addressees.
-
In this article the author expresses his opinion according to which the provisions of Article 10 of Law No 187/2012 and of Article 39 (1) b) and c) of the Criminal Code are contrary to the Constitution of Romania, republished, as well as to the European standard in the matter, namely the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
-
In this study, the author makes an analysis – partly critical – of the provisions of Article 2358 (1) and (2) of the new Romanian Civil Code referring to the assignment of the mortgage and of Article 2427 of the same Code regarding the change in rank of the mortgage. Although the author appreciates, in general, as positive the regulations of the new Romanian Civil Code related to the assignment of mortgage and to the change in its rank, separately from the claim which it guarantees, nevertheless, in the conclusion there are retained a number of shortcomings in the drafting of the mentioned texts, for which reason several de lege ferenda proposals are made.
-
In this study the authors examine, rather exhaustively, the problems of regulating the submission of the written notes by the parties, namely: both the „common law” in the matter [Article 244 (2) and Article 394 (2) of the new (Romanian) Civil Procedure Code] and a series of special provisions in the field, included in the same Code [Article 244 (3); Article 244 (4); Article 222 (2); Article 383], and finally, after examining the legal consequences of the non-compliance with the mentioned rules, they formulate a series of interesting conclusions with respect to the topic discussed.
-
The issue of blank bill of exchange titles has always been a subject that has opened the path for debates and controversies, being always of present interest. The interest of clarifying this legal figure is not only a theoretical one, but also a practical one, the blank promissory note being a means of security frequently encountered within the credit contracts concluded by banks. The advantages conferred by the blank promissory note, consisting in the easy way of establishing the title, the flexibility of its content from the perspective of its possibility of filling in, the rapidity of its conversion into a title that can be subjected to enforcement, the restriction of the debtor’s possibilities to contest it and the celerity of the procedure for settlement of such disputes, reflect undeniable arguments for the use of such a legal instrument in the professionals’ practice. This study aims to emphasize certain aspects related to the issue of the blank promissory note, its guarantee and the defences of issuer and of the guarantor of the blank promissory note within the enforcement of the bill of exchange, also with reference to the case of entry into insolvency of the issuer.