-
In this article we shall present the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the right to entry and to stay of the third-countries nationals members of the family of the Union citizens, as it evolved from the beginning to the present day, with its incoherences and inconsistencies, but also with its advances. The Court of Justice has contributed to the European integration, through the freedom of movement, more than the political institutions of the Union (the Council, the Parliament and the Commission) , so that the new legislation adopted in this area has incorporated the jurisprudential acquis. The institution of the European citizenship, which transforms the Community and the Union into a more political organization, has also contributed to open the freedom of movement to the third-countries nationals in cases in which they couldn’t benefit of it and to transform the national legislation on immigration under the influence of the Union law as interpreted by the Court of Justice. Of course, the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice is often criticizable and, indeed, has encountered much criticism both from the part of the States and of the scholar literature for its openness to the third-countries nationals, which puts in danger the national legislations on immigration. We also gave our own opinion on the solutions of the Court, not only when we didn’t agree with them, but also when they has been criticised, in order to defend them because we considered that they are correct. As Romania is a member of the European Union, the implications of the jurisprudence in the area of the freedom of movement are of a great importance, so our study may contribute to inform the national jurisdictions in this respect. -
Cauzele conexate nr. 26581/17 și nr. 31024/17, Oddone și Pecci c. San Marino. Hotărârea din data de 17 octombrie 2019
-
Reclamanții nu pot solicita în temeiul răspunderii civile delictuale daune de la un terț pentru degradări aduse imobilului în condițiile în care au cumpărat imobilul în anul 2018 prin contract de vânzare-cumpărare în formă autentică și puteau invoca răspunderea civilă contractuală pentru vicii sau pentru evicțiune. Acțiunea în răspundere civilă delictuală este o acțiune personală care aparține proprietarului imobilului de la momentul producerii faptei ilicite și potrivit art. 1707 alin. (4) C.civ. reclamanții nu au dreptul să se plângă privitor la starea construcțiilor dobândite, deoarece lucrul dobândit are exact calitățile pe care le așteptau de la el. În categoria drepturilor accesorii se pot include drepturi reale (opozabile erga omnes), cum este, spre exemplu, dreptul de servitute, care se transmite automat odată cu înstrăinarea fondului (dominant sau aservit). În ceea ce privește eventualele drepturi personale consimțite de vânzător, ca regulă generală, acestea nu se transmit la cumpărător, care este un având cauză cu titlu particular. (Curtea de Apel Craiova, Secția I civilă, Decizia nr. 223 din 16 martie 2021,www.portaljust.ro)
-
Principiul suveranității naționale consacrat în art. 2 alin. (1) din Constituție se reflectă la nivelul Parlamentului prin suveranitatea acestuia. Un prim efect direct al suveranității forului legislativ este independența acestuia și a membrilor săi, precum și autonomia organizatorică, funcțională, financiară și disciplinară a Camerei Deputaților și Senatului. ...
-
According to Article 19 of the Government Emergency Ordinance No 20/2021, the doctors, regardless of specialty, acquire or lose by a Government decision which declares or terminates the state of alert, without any training, evaluation or sanction, a special professional competence to treat persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, for which they would not be liable with their patrimony if they complied with the guides and protocols approved by the order of the Minister of Health. The regulation represents a violation of Article 34 (3) of the Romanian Constitution, generating an uncertainty regarding the existence and extent of the doctors’ rights and violating the fundamental right to the protection of citizens’ health. First, the criteria for exercising the medical profession (acquisition and loss of a professional competence) are delegated by emergency ordinance by the exceptional legislator (the Government) to the executive (the Government), in order to be established by a legal act with inferior force than the law, in violation of Article 1 (4) and (5) of the Constitution. Secondly, the fundamental rights to Life, provided by Article 2 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and, respectively, to Health care, regulated by Article 34 of the Constitution, guaranteed by the control of the medical profession (embodied in legal provisions imposing some strict conditions for acquiring professional competence and liability for the medical act), are eluded by the permission granted to non-specialists to intervene, apparently without liability, on the human body.
-
In this article we have looked into the content of the concept of case law of the European Court of Human Rights, determining in the national criminal process the legal nature and the presentation of the reasons for its application. We have also addressed the premises of using case law as a source of law within the criminal trial, highlighting the particularities and advantages of the applicability of the case law of the E.C.H.R. within criminal trial. Through the research carried out, it has been conducted a complex investigation of the theoretical-legislative aspects regarding the applicability of the case law of the E.C.H.R. within the criminal trial as a source of law. The paper formulates conclusions and recommendations that can represent a scientific basis for possible legislative amendments. In the present study, we reiterated the most current theoretical-applicative issues, as well as the methodological aspects regarding the applicability of the case law of the E.C.H.R. in the criminal trial, being revealed some concepts of major importance for the national doctrine and practice.
-
The object of the paper are the standards which, according to the European Court of Human Rights, must be met by the procedure of hearing witnesses so that the defendant be given an adequate and proper opportunity to question them and the requirements of the fair trial be satisfied. Those standards include a relative right of the accused to confront the prosecution witnesses, the right to legal assistance and the principle of immediacy of witness examination. The latter principle has certain implications regarding the requirement that witnesses should give evidence at trial and that the hearing of witnesses should be repeated in the appeal proceedings and in other situations in which new judges are appointed during trial. It is applicable, pace the Constitutional Court, in the procedure concerning the confirmation of the prosecutor’s decision to discontinue the proceedings. All along the study we follow the way in which the European Court of Human Rights uses the method of combination of criteria to evaluate the interferences with the rights of the accused.
-
Din prevederile art. 34 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 165/2013, rezultă că în vederea soluționării dosarelor de despăgubire, legiuitorul a stabilit un termen de 60 de luni de la data intrării în vigoare a legii. Rezultă că formularea unei cereri înaintea expirării acestui termen este prematură. Această concluzie este întărită de dispozițiile art. 35 alin. (2), potrivit cărora în cazul în care entitatea învestită de lege nu soluționează decizia în termenele prevăzute la art. 33 și 34, persoana care se consideră îndreptățită se poate adresa instanței de judecată.” (Curtea de Apel Cluj, Secția I civilă, Decizia nr. 2776 din 10.12.2015)
-
The present study aims to analyze a problem that recently appeared in the criminal procedural practice considering the Decision No 250/2019 of the Constitutional Court by which the provisions of the first sentence of Article 377 (4) and Article 386 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code were assessed as constitutional only insofar as the court of law rules on the change of the legal classification given to the deed by the act of notification by a judgment that does not settle the merits of the case. By presenting a concrete case study, the opinions expressed in the doctrine and by practitioners, as well as the analysis of the grounds of the decision we will conclude on the applicability of the aforementioned decision at the time of analyzing the more favourable criminal law, whether the procedural institution of changing of the legal classification or that of the legal qualification is incidental, and whether it is necessary to rule on the more favourable criminal law by a separate conclusion.
-
Cauza nr. 2205/16, Keskin c. Olandei. Hotărârea din data de 19 ianuarie 2021 Cauza privește imposibilitatea reclamantului de a interoga, în calitate de acuzat într-un dosar privind infracțiunea de înșelăciune, martorii ale căror declarații, consemnate într-un raport al poliției, au fost utilizate ca probe pentru condamnarea sa.
-
The content of the paper reveals the changes in the E.C.H.R. case law occurred in the matter of interrogation of the prosecution witnesses following the pronouncement of the judgments in the cases Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom, respectively Schatschaschwili v. Germany. The author considers that by the two judgments E.C.H.R. has returned to each of the three conditions imposed by its own case -law for the use as evidence of „anonymous statements”, establishing the exact opposite of those estab lished by its previous case law on those conditions. At the same time, the author emphasizes that through the analyzed judgments E.C.H.R. has practically radically changed its case law outlined over more than 20 years. Next, it proceeds to the presentation of the grounds retained by the E.C.H.R. in the two cases, after which the author emphasizes the obvious contradictions existing between these grounds and those established by the E.C.H.R. on the same issues in previous cases. Finally, the author points out that, despite the contradictions and inconsistencies shown in this paper, presently the case law Al-Khawaja and Tahery – Schatschaschwili exclusively governs the conditions under which it is determined whether by using the „anonymous” or „unverified” statements it has been violated or not the procedural guarantee written down in Article 6 (3) d) of the Convention.
-
Dreptul de trecere, reglementat de art. 616–619 din vechiul C.civ., trebuie înțeles sub trei ipostaze: aceea a dreptului de a cere recunoașterea servituții de trecere, ipostaza exercitării servituții legale de trecere și ipostaza dreptului de a cere modificarea servituții legale de trecere. Legat de dreptul de a cere recunoașterea servituții de trecere, acesta este considerat ca având un caracter potestativ, constituind o simplă facultate pentru proprietarul locului înfundat. Prin urmare, atunci când un imobil devine loc înfundat, proprietarul său poate reclama, prin manifestarea sa unilaterală de voință, să îi fie stabilită o servitute legală de trecere. Caracterul potestativ al dreptului rezultă cu claritate din formularea „poate reclama” din art. 616 din vechiul C.civ. (Curtea de Apel Craiova, Secția civilă, Decizia nr. 739 din 9 iulie 2019, www.rolii.ro)
