-
The need to analyze the condition of guilt in engaging the legal liability of the physician does not result only from the ECHR Judgment in Ioniță Case, which ruled that the physician’s liability itself is based on the notion of medical negligence, but especially because of its specific aspects. According to recent practice, the intensity of medical guilt in the degree of culpa levissima is able to lead to de facto exoneration from criminal liability (through a symbolic sanction) in order to focus on repairing the victim’s prejudice. The consequence of changing the vision on the medical legal liability from a punitive-criminal liability of the physician to a reparative liability facilitates the perception of the French conception of the contractual liability of the health unit. This does not remove the personal liability of the employed physician, but limits it to a psychic attitude of elusion of the system of cooperation and control of the health unit, which brings it closer to the indirect intention. Hence the need to distinguish between indirect intention and guilt with forethought (recklessness), which in its turn is different from guilt without forethought (negligence). -
The present study aims to give an answer to the legal framework regarding the possible staff reduction followed by dismissal, measures that would have as sole purpose to increase the profit of the employer. Against the background of the ambiguity of Article 65 of the Labour Code, it is considered that such a measure is rationally possible only if the employer has a profit that is below the level of the average profit existing in the sector/field of activity (a situation that can be evaluated in relation to the financial data from the Trade Register Office and with the data that is published periodically by the Ministry of Public Finance). Only in such a case the condition of the real and serious cause is met.
-
The article presents the constitutional landmarks which justify the sanction of the absolute nullity of the violation of the provisions referring to the material competence and competence according to the person’s quality of the criminal investigation body and analyzes this nullity from the perspective of the processual and procedural documents that establish the sanction, which has the effect of resumption of the criminal prosecution by the competent body or the exclusion of some processual documents or probative procedures.
-
The judicial administrator will submit a monthly report containing the description of how he has performed his duties, an account of the expenses incurred with the administration of the procedure or of other expenses made from the funds existing in the debtor’s estate, as well as, if necessary, the stage of performing the inventory. The report will also mention the fee received by the judicial administrator, by specifying modality of calculation thereof. The report will be submitted to the case file and an extract shall be published in the BIP. Every 120 days, the syndic-judge will analyze and rule on the stage of continuation of the procedure, through a resolution by which he will be able to establish certain measures as duty of the judicial administrator and he will grant an administrative term of control or of trial, as the case may be. In the event that there are contentious or non-contentious applications, as well as in the hypothesis in which the syndic-judge deems it necessary, he will order the urgent summoning of the interested persons and of the judicial administrator, for the purpose of solving the applications or for ordering the necessary measures.
-
În lipsa unui probatoriu care să demonstreze existența unei activități autonome a inculpaților de inițiere, respectiv constituire a unei grupări infracționale, activitate care să rămână distinctă de comiterea infracțiunii ce a constituit scopul acesteia și care să vizeze organizarea acțiunilor infracționale, prin fixarea modalității și a coordonatelor de săvârșire a acestora, precum și a sarcinilor și rolului fiecărui membru în cadrul grupării constituite, fapta capătă valențele juridice ale pluralității ocazionale, prevăzute de articolul 77 lit. a) C.pen.
-
The recent Administrative Code (approved by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 57/2019) has taken over from the old regulation (the Law on local public administration No 215/2001), with some amendments, the rules regarding the function of public administrator at the level of communes, cities, municipalities, counties and associations of inter-community development. In this article, the author mainly considers the appointment of the public administrator by the mayor, the delegation of his attributions, including that of the main loan officer. Special attention is paid to the management contract (its object, the rights and obligations of the contracting parties, its duration and its cessation). Regarding the legal nature of the respective contract, the author’s opinion is that this is an administrative contract, of public law. Among the arguments considered the following are included: it is regulated by the Administrative Code; one of the parties is a public authority; its object consists in „coordinating some compartments of the specialized apparatus or of the public services”; it can be terminated (unilaterally) by the public authority. The end of the article is devoted to the triptych at the level of communes, cities and municipality, triptych consisting of the mayor, the deputy mayor and the public administrator. The idea is that the delegation of some of the attributions to the public administrator does not remove the competence of the mayor to exercise any attributions given by law in his competence.
-
The generation of public procurement directives1 adopted in 2014 supplemented the number of exclusion grounds from the contract award procedure, adding, inter alia, the hypothesis from Article 57 (4) (d): „where the contracting authority has sufficiently plausible indications to conclude2 that the economic operator has entered into agreements with other economic operators aimed at distorting competition”. The respective exclusion ground has been regulated in the public procurement directives as an optional ground, being however provided for the Member States the possibility to transpose it into national laws as a compulsory ground. This regulatory modality, which inexplicably restricts the scope of incidence only at the conclusion of agreements, although competition can be affected by other methods, and which allows different transpositions by the Member States, has led many doctrinaires to react critically to the prospect that such an important exclusion ground generate a relatively narrow and non-unitary practice at Union level.
-
The verification of scripts is an incident in relation to the literal evidence, more precisely a procedure to which it is subjected a contested written document under private signature. The contested written documents under private signature may be subjected to a verification procedure either by principal way, by a preventive action, having exclusively such an object, or by incidental way, during a trial. The verification of the written document under private signature, by principal way, is admissible, under the conditions of Articles 359–363 of the Civil Procedure Code, if there was not or there is not a trial pending in which that written document had been opposed or is being opposed. Instead, the verification of the written document under private signature, by incidental way, is regulated in Articles 301–303 of the Civil Procedure Code, whose provisions are the object of this study. Article 301 of the Civil Procedure Code regulates the attitude that must be manifested by the person to whom such a written document under private signature is opposed, given that such a written document has no evidentiary power unless it is expressly or tacitly acknowledged or if it is declared as being truthful after being verified by the court.
-
This paper aims to analyse the interconnectivity between the will of the donor and the general validity requirements for donations in the Romanian civil law. As part of the continental tradition of civil law, the 2009 Civil Code of Romania maintains the will theory at the forefront of its contract law. Within this framework, the legal concept of will encompasses the mental process of volition, during which the individual reflects and arrives at a decision, and the utterance of said decision. As a result, the notion of free will forms the foundation of contractual freedom. Through its gratuitous nature, a donation is both a contract and an act of liberality. As such, the legislator’s reluctance in the field of liberalities has influenced how the general requirements of validity were ultimately shaped. Liberalities are demarcated, from the volitional point of view, by the liberal intent of the donor, and from the economic standpoint, by the reduction of the donor’s patrimony. This impoverishment of the donor is the source of the legislator’s reluctance. Thus, our effort sets out to trace the influence of the liberal intent upon the general validity requirements of a donation contract. For this purpose, the present paper is divided into four main sections, corresponding to said requirements: cause, consent, capacity and object. While cause and consent derive naturally from the will theory, capacity and object were also subordinated to the liberal intent of the donor. As such, the common incapacity was entwined with a special variant which absolutely presumes the suggestion or captation of the donor’s mind. In regard to the object, the donor cannot dispose of the good belonging to another, unlike in the case of a sale contract.
-
The climate dispute, developed explosively in the last decade, has had a first experience also at the level of EU law through People’s Climate Case (2018) in which 10 families and a civic association have brought an action before the EU Tribunal against the European Parliament and the European Commission for the insufficiency of the objectives assumed in the matter of climate changes. It was required the cancellation of several European Union legislative texts in the clime package and a compensation for the prejudice claimed to be incurred in this context. By the Ordinance of 8 May 2019, the action was dismissed as inadmissible, as the conditions of Article 263 (4) TFEU were not met, whereas there had been challenged legislative texts which did not concern and did not affect the applicants individually. The case law thus created leads to conclusions notable for the climate justice.
-
The article proposes a sensitive topic in the Romanian criminal procedure, namely to determine the extent to which the cases of absolute nullity are limitatively provided by the Criminal Procedure Code (Article 281 of the Criminal Procedure Code) or whether there are cases of nullity of the processual or procedural documents which, although not included in the enumeration of Article 281 of the Criminal Procedure Code, are, however, veritable cases of absolute nullity. The problem is all the more delicate since the national doctrine is situated, up to this moment, in the comfort zone in which the cases of absolute nullity are equated to those of express nullity and those of relative nullity to those of virtual nullity. I have shown, with examples from the practice, but also from the doctrine (too timid so far), that there are situations of virtual absolute nullity of the criminal processual acts not even listed in the content of Article 281 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as well as the situations in which they may become incidental.
-
The direct action in the guarantee for hidden vices is still a new subject in the legal doctrine and especially in the Romanian judicial practice. At present, judicial practice has not committed such an action, although the issue has been debated, both in the doctrine of the old Civil Code, and especially in the doctrine of the new Civil Code. What is even more surprising is that the legislator understood to directly regulate such direct action in the case of the guarantee for eviction, without regulating it in the case of the cover for hidden vices. If technical and legal issues seem relatively simple in the case of direct action for hidden vices against a previous vendor or first seller, things get complicated when it comes to direct action in hidden vices against the contractor. The present study aims to identify the legal nature and the basis of the direct action in the guarantee for hidden vices against the contractor, thus establishing its admissibility criteria. By the arguments that we will render, we hope to contribute to the shaping of some defining elements of direct action that will facilitate its practical application.
