-
By the provisions of Article 657 (2) of the Civil Code it is regulated the situation in which the destruction of a smaller part of a building takes place, destruction that does not affect the building as a whole nor in a proportion of no more than half of its value, in which situation the co-owners are bound to contribute to the restoration of the common parts proportionally to the quota-share of each of them. The law establishes the obligativity of those co-owners who either do not want or can not participate in the restoration, to assign the quota-shares of the right of forced joint ownership to the other co-owners, meaning that it establishes a modality of extinguishing the right of private property, which, in our opinion, is likely to give rise to some situations that are hard to accept. -
Although the European Union’s activities hardly integrate into the civilist logic of the „illicit legal act”, its non-contractual liability is triggered in particular for what the doctrine generically calls „behaviours” considered to be illegal. Even under this generous hypothesis, the Union liability can only be engaged under very strict conditions, less established by the Treaties and, rather, by the judge in Luxembourg, on the basis of some rules that discourage the litigants, limiting the possibility, in procedural and material terms, to bring such actions. The jurisdiction to settle the disputes concerning non-contractual liability of EU exclusively pertains to the European Unional jurisdictions, by applying Article 268 TFEU, which necessarily implies that the non-contractual liability of the Union must be engaged solely on the basis and under the conditions of EU law. Such an argument is fundamentally justified by the fact that engaging this liability very often implies that the scope of application is an appreciation of the Union’s policy, which is why the exclusion of the competence of any national jurisdiction appears to be natural.
-
Concluded on 12 December 2015, and entering into force on 4 November 2016, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change establishes the new international legal regime of the global response to threat of climate change. Contributing to the application of the Framework Convention of 1992, the Agreement adds the objective of adaptation and breaks the tradition of the Kyoto Protocol (1997), by imposing a new approach in this field, having in its center the limitation to 2°C and, whenever possible, 1,5°C of the growth of global average temperature, in relation to preindustrial levels, determined national contributions, and a transparency mechanism in ensuring the compliance of the self-assumed commitments. Accepting climate change as a „common concern of mankind” with scientific legitimacy of the conventional process and a specific legal value, being neither a „convention” nor a „protocol”, the Agreement has a universal nature, and it completes and transforms the international legal regime of the global climate action. Innovating principles are consecrated: intergenerational equity, climate justice or progression principle, new market mechanisms, with limited action, the facilitating mechanism, periodical evaluation, et al. An important role in imposing the new strategy and the new mechanism of action in climatic matters is held by the negotiations related to the post-2015 Conferences of Parties, designed to establish the „roadmap” and the proceedings for the preparation and enforcement, after 2020, of the Paris Agreement. Part of the new international conventional context regarding the new global challenges, the Agreement completes and updates the climate regime, as part of the international environmental law, bearing important specificities.
-
The purpose of the author’s approach is to determine the real meaning of the contestation for annulment in relation to the other means of appeal regulated in the new Civil Procedure Code. In this respect, the author considers, in full agreement with the current case law and doctrine, that in the processual system in force the contestation for annulment has as a fundamental objective the correction of some procedural mistakes, and not of some substantive errors. In this study additional arguments are presented in favour of the thesis according to which the contestation for annulment regulated by Article 503 (2) point 2 of the new Civil Procedure Code can not have the meaning of envisaging the substantive mistakes, whereas such an approach does not have any support in the provisions of the legislation in force. The author expresses reservations also with regard to the establishment of an extraordinary means of appeal, of the sort of the former extraordinary recourse, which would make possible to remedy some substantive mistakes. In this respect, the author has noted that the trend of modern times is not one that would lead to the multiplication of the means of appeal, as it happened in our country in the last three decades, but to their rationalization and achievement of efficiency. However, an establishment of a new means of appeal could only be discussed in the context of a substantial reform of our judicial system.
-
The study proposes the analysis of a jurisprudential solution from the perspective of the regulations on the tort civil liability for the prejudices caused by things in order to signal the recognition of the reparable nature of some new categories of prejudices. The arguments exposed are substantiated on the regulation of the Civil Code, but also on the opinions expressed in the classical and contemporary doctrine, supporting the need to ensure the full reparation of all prejudices caused to the victim.
-
Although the Paulian action is a legal mechanism, in principle very well known, when it comes to its practical application, in order to effectively promote such action, it is very important to have a thorough knowledge of the conditions that must be met for such action both to be promoted and to be allowed. This study is divided into two parts, in which first the general conditions and then the special conditions for the promotion of the Paulian action are presented. Also, in view of the legislative changes brought about by the entry into force of the new Romanian Civil Code, but also by amending the French Civil Code of 2016, we considered opportune a comparative presentation of the novelties brought by the two legal systems.
-
In this article, the author presents the procedure of individual complaint of the persons before the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Turkey. According to the Turkish Constitution and to the Law No 6216/2011 on establishing the procedures before the Constitutional Court, this procedure is an exceptional means of appeal which can be used after all the other legal means of appeal have been exhausted. The individual complaint before the Constitutional Court fulfils two basic functions: the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the persons and the protection of the national legal order.
-
Fraud is perhaps the cornerstone of the Paulian action. In this sense, there is no right to action without there being a fraud in the interests of one or some of the creditors. Therefore, it is very important to know the elements that characterize the Paulian fraud. This is because the damage caused to the creditor is a consequence of the fraudulent attitude of the debtor who concludes an act with a third person with the sole purpose of hiding from the pursuit of certain goods. So, the first element to be determined in order to formulate a Paulian action is the existence of fraud that has caused the creditor’s prejudice. Through this study, we have tried to highlight some of the most important judgments in the French judicial practice that have created principles for the application of the Paulian action. Although many of them have been pronounced many decades ago, their effects are still occurring at present, and the courts which have pronounced them have shown wisdom and clarity in setting out principles that ultimately shaped a unitary judicial practice in French law. Finally, the study also presents the regulation of the Paulian fraud in the sense of the new Romanian Civil Code, with references to the new French Civil Code.
-
This study is an analysis of how the direct judicial control is exercised over the problems arisen in the execution of the custodial sentences, through a new institution, the one of the judge of supervision of deprivation of liberty, as well as an analysis of the limits of his competences. Likewise, the study also analyzes the juridical dimension of the administrativejurisdictional complaints filed by the persons deprived of liberty in order to defend their rights and interests. The study is based on the conclusions drawn from the activity of the author, as registrar, at the office of the judge of supervision of deprivation of liberty.
-
Through this study we have made a thorough analysis of the conditions of admissibility of the special cancellation (revocation) action regulated by the provisions of Article 117 of the Law No 85/2014 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and of insolvency, as well as an analysis of the possibility of cancelling (revoking) any fraudulent act concluded by the debtor in the 2 years prior to the opening of the insolvency procedure. Likewise, we have analyzed what operations concluded, in the two years prior to the opening of the procedure, with the persons who have legal relationships with the debtor may be cancelled and the benefits recovered, if they are to the detriment of the creditors, except for the acts concluded in good faith in the execution of an agreement with the creditors, concluded as a result of extrajudicial negotiations for restructuring the debtor’s debts.
-
The study aims to present a case solved by German courts. It was raised the issue of the legal qualification of the winning under a beer cap, on terms of several people having put together the money for purchasing two boxes of beer and having bought them for that amount, including the bottle with the cap which contained the prize. In the case briefly presented it was necessary to determine whether the winning belongs only to the person who discovered the prize under the cap or to all the persons who have contributed with money to purchase the bottle containing the winning cap.
-
Recognition of the adherence of leniency to the legal phenomenon or its inclusion in the extrajuridical field is determined by the nature of philosophicalmaterialist or idealist conceptions. Amnesty and pardon are based on the socio-political grounds and have as foundation the feelings of gentleness, magnanimity, compassion. Justice is the ideal state of society, achievable by ensuring, for each separately and for everyone together, the enjoyment of legitimate rights and interests. The fundamental components or values of the notion of justice are: righteousness, social utility, legal certainty. The concept of leniency is related to all the three elements. By its very name, its functions and its purpose, the law must be based on the idea of righteousness. The essence of the idea of righteousness is to treat similar cases equally and different cases in distinct ways. The exercise of leniency is closely related to the principle of justice. Social utility means to organize a community to ensure the good of everyone and of each separately. The same social utility claiming punishment sometimes justifies the abandonment of punishment or forgiveness thereof. Legal security designates that state of safety of individuals and of society as conferred by the legal normativity by complying with its prescriptions. Although it is sometimes considered that leniency means bankruptcy in criminal justice, the legal certainty will never be affected if leniency acts are consistent with a rational legal conscience and does not harm the rights of the injured parties by committing the offence. Amnesty and pardon are not directed against legal certainty, but, on the contrary, they are put to the service of the common good, which is a proof of trust and a means of protecting the citizens. The three components of the idea of justice – righteousness, social utility and legal certainty – are in a tensed state. Amnesty and pardon are called to detension and harmonize these relations. Leniency is not in antithesis with the law, but it is inevitable for its completion.
