The European Union law principles can be source of Community law, as they have the same rank as the treaties in the hierarchy of the EU law sources. These principles are compulsory both for the EU institutions and the Member States. These binding principles include the principle of legality of indictment and punishment. Therefore, whenever a Community act requires Member States to establish punishments to be used in the event an offense provided for in that act, they must comply with. There are also some exceptions to this rule (the compulsoriness for the European Union Member States): the criminal liability of the person who committed the offense cannot be determined nor can be aggravated by breaching the Community act independently of a domestic law adopted by a Member State in view of its implementation. In this study, the authors analyze the exceptions to the principle of legality of indictment and punishment, which have a particular interest in criminal matters, given the contradictions in the Romanian and foreign criminal doctrine.

The first European Treaty, which encouraged the establishment of political groups in the European Parliament, was the Treaty of Maastricht, which established a European Union, signed in 1992 and came into force a year later. Political parties have always played an important role in democratic societies, a role demonstrated by the functioning of the role of a mediator between society and government, which they fulfill. In the European Parliament, political groups are the doctrinal expression of a pan-European cohesion.

In this study, the author makes a thorough analysis of the so-called tax havens, outlining their connection with organized crime. Thus, the definition and main characteristics of tax havens, the types of tax havens and certain measures adopted at EU level to limit thereof are portrayed herein.

The institution of course of justice interruption was first introduced in the criminal procedure of Romania in the Charles II Code of Criminal Procedure (1936), being kept in the current Code of Criminal Procedure [Art. 29 point 5 item b)] and also in the new Code of Criminal Procedure adopted by Law No. 135/2010 [Art. 40 paragraph (4)]. The author shows that the Romanian legislator failed to clarify this phrase, leaving the identification of the cases of interrupting the course of justice to the legal literature, but especially to the case law. The case law of the High Court of Cassation and Justice may conclude that the “interrupting the course of justice” phrase requires the occurrence of a criminal case pending before a court of law which has no possibility of achieving the ultimate goal of the trial due to inapplicability of any of the procedural provisions relating to jurisdiction, so that the competent court to order a legal solution cannot be determined.

In the following study, the author carries out an analysis of the Law No. 571/2004, the author emphasizing the fact that this law is actually very little known and applied, although its adoption in 2004 was made considering Romania’s accession to the European Union (this took place on January 1, 2007). For that purpose, while analyzing certain wordings of the law (which consists of a total of 11 articles), the author proposes a number of amendments and supplements thereto, in order to improve and use thereof in the social life practice.

Given the fact that, in accordance with the Community relating provisions, the new regulation of public utilities provides optimal conditions for the organization, functioning and operation of these services, respectively for delegation of these services’ management to private operators, this study aims at analyzing the manner the public utilities are managed by delegating the management of these services from the territorial administrative units to the authorized private operators.