Loading...
  • In the Romanian judicial practice more numerous cases arise with regard to the annulment of the acts of finding the irregularities committed in the field of obtaining/using the European funds and of establishing the budgetary claims or of applying the financial corrections. This casuistry raises a series of questions relating to the hypotheses in which, in this matter, the European legislation is directly applied and, respectively, when the Romanian legislation is applied and which one specifically (as the case may be, the Government Ordinance No 79/2003 or the Government Emergency Ordinance No 66/2011). In this study the author answers the above-mentioned questions.
  • The succession of the criminal codes has created numerous transitory situations requiring a functional system of principles to be solved. In this context, the courts have provided different solutions to some aspects related to the application of the criminal law in time, thus generating a non-unitary practice. The main cause of these contradictions was represented by the modality of determination of the most favourable criminal law. Just when it seemed that the High Court of Cassation and Justice had clarified the misunderstandings, the Constitutional Court has pronounced the Decision No 265/2014 which completely changes the situation, offering an interpretation that does not find many followers among jurists.
  • This study undertakes the analysis both of the amendments brought to the offences provided in Article 140 of the Law No 8/1996 by the Law No 187/2012 and of the common and specific aspects which characterize, in the author’s opinion, these offences. The author examines the amendments to the offences evoked by their connection to the legal provisions in this matter, contained in the general part of the Criminal Code. At the same time, the paper emphasizes the common aspects regarding the scope, the subjects and the constitutive content of the offences presented, as well as the specific aspects relative to the special legal object and to the material element of these offences. The study presents the doctrinal points of view, as well as the author’s remarks and de lege ferenda proposals in the analyzed area.
  • Unlike the previous Criminal Procedure Code (1968), which briefly provided that the prosecutor must prepare a reasoned proposal of taking the measure of preventive detention of the defendant, the new Criminal Procedure Code regulates in a more detailed manner the proposal for preventive detention of the defendant in the course of criminal prosecution, by introducing the obligation of the prosecutor to indicate the legal grounds. In exchange, the new criminal processual law does no longer provide the prosecutor’s obligation to hear the defendant in the presence of the lawyer of his choice or appointed ex officio, before drawing up the proposal for preventive detention, as provided in the previous Criminal Procedure Code. Under such circumstances, the authors analyze the institution of proposal of preventive detention, by presenting some critical aspects and by proposing some improvements to the new regulation. Key
  • Instanța Curții de Apel Oradea a dispus condamnarea inculpatului pentru săvârșirea infracțiunii de uciderea animalelor, cu intenție, fără drept, prevăzută în art. 25 alin. (1) lit. a) din Legea nr. 205/2004, republicată1, dispunând, totodată, înlăturarea condamnării inculpatului pentru săvârșirea infracțiunii prevăzute în art. 217 alin. 1 din Codul penal anterior (cu notă aprobativă).
  • O autoritate publică cu atribuții de supraveghere, prevenire și control într-o anumită arie de activitate, având în vedere poziția dominantă pe care o ocupă în virtutea prerogativelor de putere publică pe care legea i le pune la dispoziție pentru realizarea interesului public în slujba căruia se află, are obligația, rezultată din exigențele bunei administrări, să emită, pentru organizarea activității sale, norme administrative clare, care să nu genereze riscul distorsionării liberei concurențe și apariției conflictelor de interese.
  • Principiul separației puterilor a fost „importat” din Marea Britanie, englezii fiind cei care, în secolul al XVII-lea, au început să îl aplice în încercarea de a fragmenta puterea politică ce aparținea, în mod tradițional, doar regelui. Apoi, un pas important pe acest drum anevoios a fost făcut de gânditorii politici francezi, ideea modernă a separării puterilor în stat datorându-se filosofului și gânditorului iluminist francez, baronul de Montesquieu, care a făcut distincție între trei puteri în stat: legislativă, executivă și judiciară – acesta fiind fundamentul separației puterilor regăsit (și repetat) în dreptul constituțional modern. În concepția lui Montesquieu, cele trei puteri trebuie să aparțină unor organe diferite ale statului: Libertatea nu admite unirea a două și cu atât mai mult a trei puteri în sânul uneia și aceleiași puteri a statului. Dacă puterea legislativă e unită cu cea executivă, atunci cel ce edictează legile aplicându-le nu va urma indicațiile cuprinse în ele, tolerând încălcarea lor, și în țară va domni arbitrarul. Dar arbitrarul va interveni și în cazul în care în aceleași mâini se unesc puterea judecătorească și cea executivă, judecătorul va fi asupritor, întrucât va fi în același timp și judecător, și executantul legii. De asemenea, nu pot fi unite, în același organ, puterea judecătorească și cea legiuitoare, întrucât, procedându-se astfel, judecătorul, rezolvând procesele, nu va urma strict legea, ci are posibilitatea să introducă schimbări în conținutul legii
  • Introducere. Actuala ordine mondială cunoaște o profundă transformare, ca urmare a multiplelor raporturi economice, sociale, politice, care influențează umanitatea, prin procesul globalizării. Revoluția ideilor, care depășește spațiul exprimării și dezbaterilor, își găsește o formă de manifestare printr-o diversitate de acțiuni, așa încât putem vorbi de o cultură mondială a informației care capătă consistență în orice domeniu, de la cel care vizează natura planetei noastre, până la cele care se referă la viața cotidiană. Așadar, în contextul exploziei informaționale, în care tehnologia dobândește dimensiune inteligentă, invadând în acest fel însăși existența noastră, aceasta rămâne totuși, la momentul actual, dependentă relativ de umanitate.
  • În contextul actual, în care justiția română își face temele sub monitorizarea „Mecanismului de Control și Verificare” (MCV), în care atacurile la adresa independenței justiției au crescut semnificativ, în care reținerea și arestarea echivalează, în mentalul colectiv, cu dovezi indubitabile de vinovăție, rolul judecătorului în realizarea actului de justiție pare să fie unul secundar, de vreme ce nimeni nu mai pare interesat de hotărârea judecătorească definitivă pronunțată în dosarele penale.
  • Mărturisesc că, atunci când am ales titlul acestui studiu, am interferat cu modelul de prezentare în două părți, introdus de un cunoscut colaborator și prieten, specialist în legile internetului, Bogdan Manolea, care, cu ceva ani în urmă, într-o prestigioasă conferință cu prezență internațională, identifica o primă parte anarhică și o a doua tehnică a discursului său. De ce o perspectivă românească? Pentru a sublinia critic modelul, mereu altfel, de abordare a reformelor din sistemul judiciar românesc, pe tiparul „teoriei mixte”, pe care, ani de-a rândul, generație după generație, la aproape toate disciplinele de studiu, dascălii noștri au încercat să ne-o inoculeze ca pe un vaccin, în dorința de a ne obișnui, în realitate, cu compromisul, vecin cu improvizația, de la care a împrumutat caracterul definitiv. Noi nu copiem, noi inovăm, mințindu-ne adesea că adaptăm diverse instituții, proceduri, reguli din tot atât de diverse surse, deși, funcțional, asemenea corpului biologic, aceste grefe haotice și repetate ajung să fie refuzate sau să schimonosească organismul nostru judiciar, altfel suficient de robust prin robustețea componenților săi.
  • Introducere. Sistemul Ministerului Public are un statut special, misiunea organizațională fiind stabilită atât prin Legea fundamentală, cât și prin legea privind organizarea judiciară. Obiectivul său general este înfăptuirea ordinii de drept prin respectarea drepturilor și libertăților cetățenilor, prin efectuarea unor activități legitime și oportune care trebuie să îndeplinească anumite standarde minimale de legitimitate și de tip procesual.
  • Preliminarii. Termenul de securitate are o adresabilitate variată și complexă, putând influența și afecta atât individul, cât și orice nivel de organizare socială, colectivitate, stat sau organizație internațională. În mod sintetic, noțiunea de securitate1 implică lipsa oricăror amenințări, dar și posibilitatea prezervării unui nucleu de valori și a bunăstării2. Pentru orice individ și pentru o comunitate în ansamblul său sentimentul de securitate este acut și se construiește pe trei coordonate esențiale: liniștea, ocrotirea și absența fricii. Aceste trei coordonate definesc sensul primar al noțiunii de securitate a cărei etimologie provine din latinescul securus, desemnând pe cel care nu se teme (sine cura)3.
  • By means of this study, the author tends to point out that, despite the principle of „equality before the law of the children born out of wedlock to the children born in wedlock”, provided by Article 48 (3) of the Constitution and reaffirmed by Article 260 of the Romanian Civil Code, in the Romanian law, no less, there are situations of „different legal treatment” of the two categories of children. Specifically, it is raised for discussion the different legal regulation of some aspects, as in the cases relating to: „determination of the paternity”, „acquiring the name”, „confirmation of the filiation” and „prohibition of the adoption of children whose parents did not reach the age of 14”. Likewise, for the situations noted, the author substantiates de lege ferenda proposals meant to ensure respect for the principle of equality before the law of children born out of wedlock to those born in wedlock.
  • In this study, the authors have examined the provisions of the Romanian Civil Code (the Law No 287/2009) concerning the maintenance obligation (Articles 513– 534). Therefore, there are analyzed: the general principles; the subjects of the maintenance obligation; the order in which maintenance is due; the conditions of the maintenance obligation; determination and performance of the maintenance obligation.
  • This paper is a critical analysis of the new regulations concerning the punishment, from the perspective of their compliance with the principle of individualization. It discusses, by turns, the issue of the significance of the principle of individualization, of the reasons that justify the existence of some general criteria of individualization and of the questionable significance of the current general criteria of individualization, included in Article 74 of the new Criminal Code.
  • In this study the authors present a series of considerations on the decisions of the Constitutional Court and their effects, in the light of the provisions of Article 147 of the Romanian Constitution of 1991 (revised in 2003 and then republished on 31 October 2003), of the provisions of the Law No 47/1992 on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court (republished on 3 December 2010), as well as of the relevant case-law of the Constitutional Court in the matter. In this regard, the authors examine, sometimes in a critical manner, the following problems: the acts by which the Constitutional Court exercises its powers; why the decisions of the Constitutional Court have a general binding nature; whether there is a typology of the decisions of the Constitutional Court or not; the interpretative decisions of the Constitutional Court; the relations of the Constitutional Court with other public authorities arising as a result of the decisions of the Constitutional Court; the effects of the decisions of the Constitutional Court establishing the unconstitutionality of some legal provisions of parliamentary laws, ordinances, regulations and resolutions; the effects of the decisions of the Constitutional Court establishing the unconstitutionality of some provisions included in laws, before their promulgation; the effects of the decisions of the Constitutional Court on the constitutionality/unconstitutionality of the treaties or of the international agreements; the decisions of the Constitutional Court are generally binding and are effective only for the future.
  • Collective redundancy is regulated at Community level by Directive 98/59/EC, giving rise to a vast case-law, this study focusing, in this context, on a particular aspect of determining the conditions for the existence of this type of redundancy: the notion of „establishment”. The interest of such an approach is justified in the light of the recent case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which raises the question of the compatibility of the national law with Directive 98/59/EC just as regards the mentioned notion. At the same time, as regards the relation of the national law with the Community law, it appears necessary to determine the notion of employer established by the Romanian law and to correlate it with the notion of establishment, regulated by the European Directive.
  • The entry into force of the new Criminal Code has determined, as it was natural, new approaches to doctrine and jurisprudence, and one of the perspectives of analysis is the correlation with the constitutional provisions. This study aims to establish an examination of constitutionality, as regards the offence of deceit, from the practice of the Constitutional Court on the previous Criminal Code provisions, identifying situations where the new rules can generate discussions on the compatibility with the Constitution.
  • In order to achieve the objective of free circulation of civil and commercial judgments, as part of the process of judicial cooperation in civil matters, it was adopted the Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters which shall apply only to actions brought, to authentic instruments formally drawn up or registered and to court settlements approved or concluded on or after 10 January 2015. In spite of the fact that the Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 which regulated the same matters, has significantly contributed to the development of an area of the free circulation of judgments, certain differences between national rules governing jurisdiction and recognition of judgments have been constantly hindering the effectiveness of the access to justice of the Union’s members. In regard to such difficulties, the Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 shall be superseded by Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 whose provisions are aimed at unifying the rules of conflicts of jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters and at ensuring rapid and simple recognition and enforcement of judgments given in a Member State. For that purpose, the new Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 has brought, in the matters of recognition and enforcement, not only necessary clarifications but also substantial changes, such as the exclusion of the requirement of a declaration of enforceability. Moreover, a short analysis of its provisions is required regarding several aspects, such as the refusal of recognition and enforcement, the applicable procedure, the transitional provisions and the circumstances in which Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 shall continue to apply even after 10 January 2015.
  • Conform art. 207 alin. (1) C.pr.pen., atunci când procurorul dispune trimiterea în judecată a inculpatului față de care s-a luat o măsură preventivă, rechizitoriul, împreună cu dosarul cauzei, se înaintează judecătorului de cameră preliminară de la instanța competentă, cu cel puțin 5 zile înainte de expirarea duratei acestei măsuri. Apreciem că acest termen trebuie a fi considerat un termen de decădere, pentru a fi în concordanță cu prevederile Constituției României, republicată, iar nerespectarea lui atrage decăderea procurorului din dreptul de a solicita menținerea măsurii preventive (cu notă aprobativă).
  • Este acceptabilă din punctul de vedere al cerințelor impuse de dreptul la un proces echitabil motivarea hotărârii judecătorești realizată prin preluarea în considerente a unei părți din argumentele invocate, în cadrul dezbaterilor, de către una dintre părți. Câtă vreme această preluare nu s-a realizat automat, ci este rodul propriului demers al judecătorului de interpretare și aplicare a legii la situația de fapt prin prisma susținerilor părților, nu există suport pentru a se aprecia că argumentele celeilalte părți ar fi fost ignorate. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția de contencios administrativ și fiscal, Decizia nr. 1312 din 13 martie 2014)
  • The article analyzes the jurisdiction of the Romanian court to settle the divorce application in case of spouses, Romanian citizens, who do no longer reside on the Romanian territory. The problems are analyzed in relation to the Community regulations directly applicable in the Member States of the European Union, as well as to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code in this matter.
  • The article presents the itinerary covered since the entry into force of the new Civil Procedure Code (15 February 2013) by the manner in which it has been regulated the execution of the arbitral judgment. Initially, the arbitral judgment had to be invested with executory formula for the purpose of being enforced. By the Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of the new Civil Procedure Code it has been eliminated the formality of investing the arbitral judgment with executory formula, which corresponds to the imperative to accelerate the enforcement of such judgments. In our opinion, the Law No 138/2014 amending and supplementing the new Civil Procedure Code has reintroduced, however criticizably, the procedure of investment with executory formula of the arbitral judgment, in view of enforcement. The author’s conclusion is that the legislator should have kept the elimination of the procedure of investment with executory formula of the arbitral judgment, thereby contributing to the simplification and the encouragement to resort to the arbitration procedure.
  • The theme of this study concerns the distinction between the source of fiscal obligations (chargeable event of the tax base), on the one hand, and the individualization of these obligations through various fiscal administrative acts, issued for the application of the legal rules of tax law, on the other hand. In this regard, the author considers both the current Fiscal Procedure Code (the Government Ordinance No 92/2003, in force until 31 December 2015) and the new Fiscal Procedure Code (the Law No 207/2015), which expressly repeals the current Fiscal Procedure Code and shall enter into force on 1 January 2016. The author’s conclusion is that the source of the fiscal obligations is not the law itself, but the legal act, licit or illicit, which gives rise to the fiscal obligatory relation under the terms provided by law and materialized in the individual acts of application of law.
  • In this article, the author argues that the offences of deprivation of liberty and outrage committed against the criminal prosecution bodies on the occasion of finding a flagrant offence of corruption have prejudiced the public confidence in the possibilities of the competent authorities to combat such forms of criminal illicitness, the climate of public order and peace being also affected and the impact in the media being significant. It is clearly reflected from the contents of the publicized facts a shade of hilarity on the criminal prosecution bodies, an aspect that generates feelings of insecurity among the public, the comments made by readers of the online media being also made in this respect. Considering these aspects, the author initiates some discussions on the mentioned case, by presenting data about the legal proceedings, the duration thereof, the pronounced solutions, the factual situation, the means of evidence and others.
  • Furt calificat. Obiect material, bun mobil aparținând patrimoniului cultural național. Sit arheologic și zone cu patrimoniu arheologic protejat. Aplicarea legii penale mai favorabile. Grup infracțional organizat Faptele inculpaților de a constitui un grup infracțional organizat, urmate de comiterea unor detecții neautorizate într-un sit arheologic protejat, aparținând patrimoniului cultural național, și sustragerea de artefacte arheologice mobile întrunesc elementele infracțiunilor de: constituire a unui grup infracțional organizat, prevăzută în art. 367 alin. (1) C.pen., accesul cu detectoare de metale și utilizarea lor în zonele cu patrimoniu arheologic, fără autorizarea prealabilă, prevăzută în art. 26 alin. (1) din Ordonanța Guvernului nr. 43/2000 privind protecția patrimoniului arheologic și declararea unor situri arheologice ca zone de interes național, republicată, și furt calificat asupra unui bun care face parte din patrimoniul cultural, prevăzută în art. 228, 229 alin. (2) lit. a) C.pen., cu aplicarea art. 5 C.pen.
  • The author examines the problems of Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (in reference to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union to give preliminary rulings). The analysis, starting from brief theoretical considerations, grounds the author’s conclusions on the presentation of a vast case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg in the matter.
  • În ipoteza unei promisiuni bilaterale de vânzare-cumpărare, respectiv a unui act juridic prin care părțile se obligă să încheie în viitor un contract de vânzarecumpărare, acțiunea prin care beneficiarul promisiunii îi solicită instanței să pronunțe o hotărâre care să țină loc de act autentic de vânzare-cumpărare este supusă termenului general de prescripție extinctivă, chiar dacă bunul la care se referă convenția părților este un imobil, deoarece obiectul antecontractului nu este bunul imobil, ci obligația de a face, a cărei executare poate fi solicitată doar în cadrul termenului de prescripție extinctivă. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția I civilă, Decizia nr. 3447 din 4 decembrie 2014)
  • The article offers an analysis of the regulation of the institution of unworthiness to inherit as regulated by the Civil Code which entered into force on 1 October 2011. First the author had in view both the influences of the foreign regulations which served as a model for drafting the normative act and the conclusions of the Romanian doctrine and of the case law relevant in the matter, which the Romanian legislator has taken into account. Starting from the nature of civil sanction of the unworthiness to inherit, there are analyzed the modalities which can remove the effects thereof, formulating, at the same time, relevant de lege ferenda proposals in order to create a unitary system as comprehensive as possible relative to the related procedure.
  • The study is devoted to the systematic analysis of the provisions of the Law No 8/1996 on copyright and neighbouring rights devoted to the legal status of the computer programs. The analysis is also carried out by considering the internal regulations in relation to those of the Directive of the Council of the European Communities No 91/250/EEC on the legal protection of the computer programs. Specifically, the object of the analysis covers aspects such as: the definition of the computer programs; their legal nature; the elements of the computer programs subject to legal protection and those that elude this protection; the copyright holders in case of computer programs; the rights resulting from the creation of the computer programs; the capitalization of patrimonial rights in the case of computer programs.
  • In this study there are analyzed the categories of administrative acts on which there were controversies about the exercise of judicial control of these acts by means of a plea of illegality regulated by Article 4 of the Law on administrative disputed claims No 554/2004, especially prior to the amendment and supplementation of this legal text by the Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of the new Civil Procedure Code. Likewise, it is emphasized the concern of the legislator to settle the doctrinal and jurisprudential controversies concerning the scope of the object covered by this plea, by the amendments and supplements brought by this latter normative act, but, nevertheless, it is not out of the question that some of these controversies will also continue in the new legislative context, until a stable case law in the matter is formed.
  • The non-unitary practice of some courts and public prosecutor’s offices in the district of the Court of Appeal of Oradea, generated by the different interpretation of some legal provisions in the criminal and criminal processual matters, gives the author the opportunity for some comments and de lege ferenda proposals. This study deals with the controversial aspects referring to the following institutions of criminal law and of criminal processual law: the jurisdiction of the judge of rights and freedoms in the matter of preventive measures in case of joining some cases; the complex offence or the formal concurrence of offences in case of committing some acts of outrage or judiciary outrage; the solutions of the preliminary chamber; the territorial jurisdiction of the criminal prosecution bodies under the terms of unique referrals; the concurrence of qualifications (of texts, of rules) or ideal concurrence of offences; the legal nature of the institutions of waiver of application of the punishment and the postponement of the application of punishment.
  • In this paper there are presented a number of aspects on a subject of great present interest: tax fraud. The theoretical approach of this contemporary scourge has been carried out starting from the identification of the factors which favour it and of the forms of operation, ending in the review of the measures for combating it and of the types of applicable sanctions.
  • The article aims to analyze the regime of regulation and of application of punishments ordered by the judgments of the international criminal courts, at a moment when the two ad-hoc tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, are in a period close to the end of their mandate, and the International Criminal Court is undergoing crystallization of a practice, after the first final judgments of its activity were delivered. There are reviewed, on the one hand, the regulations within the statutes of these courts on punishments, their doctrinal foundations, as well as controversial aspects or aspects which give rise to comments in their judicial practice. There are also mentioned some aspects concerning the enforcement of punishments, taking into account the special circumstances in which these courts carry on their activity.
  • The entry into force of the EU Regulation No 1215/2012 brings an important element within the process of evolution designed to ensure the free movement of judgments on the territory of the European Union: suppression of the exequatur. Given that, under the influence of the Regulation No 44/2001, the first judgment delivered in the Member State of enforcement was precisely the declaration of enforceability (or the exequatur), changing the enforcement procedure within the Regulation No 1215/2012 has also brought, necessarily, a reform of the system of legal remedies. Without studying thoroughly the fundamental conditions which can lead to the refusal of enforcement, this paper aims at analyzing the main amendments which the new regulation brings in the matter of legal remedies which are available to the debtor in the Member State of enforcement, trying to make an adjustment of the case law of the European Court of Justice in the matter, to the new wording within the Regulation No 1215/2012, as well as an analysis of the compatibility of the measures adopted by Romania in view of applying the Regulation No 44/2001 on the declaration of enforceability in relation to the new system proposed by the European legislation now in force.
  • Contestația în anulare împotriva deciziilor rămase definitive în recurs, prin care a fost invocată încălcarea principiului non bis in idem, se judecă în conformitate cu dispozițiile noului Cod de procedură penală în materia contestației în anulare. Cazul de contestație în anulare, prevăzut în art. 426 lit. i) din noul Cod de procedură penală, referitor la ipoteza în care „împotriva unei persoane s-au pronunțat două hotărâri definitive pentru aceeași faptă”, nu este incident, dacă faptele cu privire la care s-au pronunțat două hotărâri definitive de condamnare sunt diferite, neexistând identitate de faptă, indiferent dacă încadrarea juridică a faptelor este aceeași. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția penală, Decizia nr. 1479 din 29 aprilie 2014)
Folosim fisierele tip cookie-uri pentru a va oferi cea mai buna experienta de utilizare a website-ului. Navigand in continuare ori ramanand doar pe aceasta pagina va exprimati acordul asupra folosirii cookie-urilor. Daca doriti sa renuntati la acestea, va rugam sa consultati Politica de Utilizare a Cookie-urilor. Anumite parti ale website-ului nu vor mai functiona corect daca stergeti toate cookie-urile. Citește mai mult... Ok