-
The study hereunder examines the ways of exercising the autonomy of will and the reflection of the principle of freedom of contract in civil procedural law. As freedom of contract, like any other freedom in fact, is not absolute or unlimited, the author quests the ways in which, within the framework of civil procedural law institutions, there are covered and operate certain assumptions which may constitute limits to the freedom of contract. In this perspective, we shall have in view institutions such as legal contracts, mediation or arbitration. -
Guaranteeing the right to defence is a fundamental principle under the Romanian criminal procedure law. Although it has strong constitutional and criminal procedure guarantees, however, its practical implementation is in some cases misinterpreted and, on the other hand, the prosecution bodies violate it sometimes, the consequence being the discrediting of the judicial process. The present article refers to jurisprudence in two cases where the defender’s right to question the opposing party and to inspect the prosecution file is restricted without legal basis.
-
Considering the importance that information technology has acquired in recent years and how it has come to influence the criminal policy at the international level, the author of this study founds it necessary to analyse the subject matter of the offence taking into account this new technological context. Thus, it has been attempted to highlight the need for a reconceptualization of the offence’s subject matter, emphasizing the idea according to which intangible elements may be part of its structure. In support of this thesis, there was reviewed the problem of theft of virtual goods and of certain cybercrimes that reveal the existence of an intangible subject matter which is likely to be interposed between the agent’s behaviour and the social value protected by the rule of incrimination. Last but not least, the author has pointed out a possible consequence of the reconceptualization of the subject matter of the offence, referring thus to the applicability of the supporting cause of self-defence.
-
Departing from the constitutional basis underlying the relations between the Constitutional Court of Romania and the European Court of Human Rights, this study examines the judicial dialogue between the two courts and the effects thereof. The conclusion of this study, based on numerous examples from case-law, is that the dialogue between the constitutional judge and the European Judge serves to develop common standards for the protection of fundamental rights, as well as to enriching those existing at national level, with effects in terms of law-making and law-enforcement.
-
By the judgement passed in the criminal case no. 754/2012, the High Court of Cassation and Justice held that, where the provisions of Article 3201 Code of Criminal Procedure are applicable, honest behaviour during the trial, consisting in the admission of having committed the acts retained in the document instituting the proceedings, cannot be considered a legal mitigating circumstance, referred to in Article 74 para. (1) (c) thesis II of the Criminal Code. This interpretation is questionable, because there is a legal difference between the two institutions, which doed not preclude their concomitant application.
-
In the study hereunder, the authors analyse the wording of Article 209 para. (2) of the new Code of Civil Procedure (Law No. 134/2010, republished, enacted on February 15th, 2013), text according to which “if the claims put forth under the counterclaim also relate to persons other than the plaintiff, these will be summoned to Court as defendants”. The authors highlight that this text had no counterpart in the former Code of Civil Procedure (1865, reprinted in 1948) and emphasize positively the new regulation which extends thus the procedural framework.
-
This study addresses, from the comparative perspective, the regulation set forth under Article 386 in the new Criminal Code. Its introductory part includes an overall assessment of the new regulations on electoral offences in the new Criminal Code which systematize rules corresponding to those which are currently included in the special legislation, namely in five regulations. The comparison of the incrimination text covered by Article 386 in the new Criminal Code aimed at checking correspondence with all the other 4 rules of incrimination of the same title currently active.
-
Dispozițiile art. 9 lit. b) din Regulamentul CE nr. 44/2001 aratã cã un asigurator care are domiciliul pe teritoriul unui stat membru poate fi acționat în justiție în alt stat membru, în cazul acțiunilor intentate de cãtre deținãtorul poliței de asigurare, asigurat sau un beneficiar, în fața instanțelor de la locul unde este domiciliat reclamantul.
-
The court having territorial jurisdiction to trial the parole requests, the requests for the amendment of sentencing enforced by final judgments, the requests for interruption of the execution of prison sentence, the appeals to the execution filed by convicts in detention, as well as appeals lodged by prisoners against the hearing reports of the appointed judge for the execution of sentences, is set under the provisions of Article 449 para. (2), 450 para. (1), 456, 460 para. (1) and (6), 461 para. (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 25 para. (6), 74 para. (5) and 77 para. (3) of Law No. 275/2006 on the execution of punishments and measures ordered by the judiciary in criminal proceedings. Sector 4 Bucharest Court, judging claims like the ones mentioned above, lodged by prisoners in the penitentiaries Bucureºti Jilava and Spital Jilava - prisons that are not located within its jurisdiction - pursuant to the Order of the Minister of Justice No. 1279/C/2000, administrative regulation not published in the “Official Gazette of Romania” and issued pursuant to a statutory provision, currently expressly repealed, breached the laws of jurisdiction, assuming a jurisdiction that, legally, falls upon other court. Also, on account of the Bucharest Court judging, in the first instance, as Court of execution, requests made by prisoners in the same prisons, after November 1st, 2011, date on which Ilfov Tribunal started to operate, had violated the legal rules governing its territorial jurisdiction.
-
The author, comparatively examining the provisions set forth under Articles 1402-1404 of the former Civil Code (1864), Article 45 of the former Commercial Code (from 1887), both currently repealed, with those set forth under Article 124 of Law No. 71/2011 relating to the implementation of the new Civil Code, concludes that, despite an explicit intervention, under the rule of the new Civil Code (Law No. 287/2009) disputed revocation is forbidden at present for all contentious rights, irrespective of their nature. Currently, disputed revocation is allowed only for assignment of rights concluded prior to October 1st, 2011 (when the new Civil Code was enacted) -
“Vague” legal concepts are inevitable, these proving their usefulness not only for covering some varied and virtually unlimited legal situations, impossible to imagine by the legislator, but also for ensuring the transition from the “the written law” to the experienced law” – given the evolution of the regulatory legal system background, while stimulating the updating of the written one. Conventional rules, primary and secondary, excel through the use of such concepts, called “autonomous”, but these are not foreign to any constitutional standards either, although one could say that, by definition, these must single out by the rigor and perfect predictability. Therefore, recognizing their indispensability and usefulness, we shall bring into focus some of the peculiarities of the review in terms of the way of interpretation and implementation of such concepts.
-
In the study hereunder, the author undertakes an analysis of Article 16 para. (1) of Law No. 554/2004 on administrative litigation (text entitled “Introducing the civil servant in the case”), statutory provision that reads as follows: “The legal demands under this law may be filed also personally against the person who assisted in the development, issuance or execution of the document or, where appropriate, who is held liable for failure to settle the demand relating to a subjective right or a legitimate interest, should there be claimed payment of compensation for damages or delay. Should the action be granted, the person concerned may be ordered to pay damages, jointly with the defendant public authority”.
