-
The procedure of registration of forgery is a procedural incident regarding the evidence by written documents, which can usually have as its object an authentic written document or a written document registered under private signature. In the case of authentic written documents, the procedure of forgery may be used when the authenticity of the findings made personally by the person who authenticated the document is contested, according to the law. In the case of the written documents under private signature, the procedure of forgery can be used when it is claimed that they have been fabricated, being admissible also in the assumption that such a document has been recognized by its author or has been verified in court, if it is proved that the recognition was the result of an actually excusable error. The investigation and establishment of forgery shall be carried out by the criminal prosecution bodies and criminal examination body or by the civil court, by incidental way, in the event that the criminal action cannot be initiated or cannot continue. The procedure of registration of forgery is applicable regardless of the nature of the forgery (material or intellectual) and false written document is also the one whose content is not real, even if there has not been committed by the operation of altering the reality. The provisions of Articles 304-308 of the Civil Procedure Code regulate the procedure applicable in the assumption of registration of forgery against a written document produced in a pending litigation, in which case the provisions of Article 315, of Article 5491 and of Article 580 of the Criminal Procedure Code must be complied with. -
A systematic analysis of relevant provisions of Law No 554/2004 on administrative disputes, Civil Procedure Code and Law No 192/2006 on mediation and organisation of the profession of mediator takes the author of this paper to the firm conclusion that in administrative disputes regulated by Law No 554/2004 mediation shall not be applied, but only the prior procedure provided by Article 7 of the Law No 554/2004. -
This study aims to debate the question of the moment when the prosecutor should address the preliminary chamber judge in view of ordering the safety measure of the special confiscation, a procedure provided by the provisions of Article 5491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, by reference to the moment of adoption of the processual solution of abandonment of the criminal prosecution, according to Article 318 of the Criminal Procedure Code. As a result of a non-unitary judicial practice, the author elaborates a few theses to decrypt the relevant provisions, he emphasizes the lack of uniformity of the judicial solutions and offers a way of settlement of the legal problem under dispute, which is perfectible. -
In the study above, the author puts forward a petition issued by the Anticorruption General Directorate (autonomous structure within the Public Ministry, coordinated by the General Prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice), under which, in relation to a female judge whose spouse (judge) was criminally prosecuted by indictment drawn up by the National Anticorruption Directorate, it is requested to be removed, administratively, from the analysis of documents (indictments, etc.) issued by the National Anticorruption Directorate. As a result of resentments, being thus in the presence of a conflict between the family interests and the public interest for administering justice. The Superior Council of Magistracy could not adopt a decision on the relevant petition within the Court, getting to a tie vote (4 votes for, 4 votes against). The author hardly criticizes the petition submitted by the Anticorruption General Directorate, considering it as an administrative interference in the work of a judge. -
This study focuses on the difficulties identified in the practice of the law courts which establishes the processual remedy made available by the criminal processual law assuming that two or more criminal judgments, on the same subject, were pronounced at different times. Thus, the judicial practice has outlined different visions in the qualification of the legal remedy given the proximity that may be encountered between the case of review on the irreconcilability of the judgments and the case of appeal for annulment on the infringement of the authority of res iudicata. -
-
The operation of establishing the execution regime requires the individualization commission to comply with the limits provided by Articles 33–38 of the Law No 254/2013, to take into account the provisions of Article 88 of the Government Decision No 157/2016 for the approval of the Regulation for the application of the Law No 254/2013 referring to the procedure for establishing the execution regime, as well as those of Article 41 of the Law No 254/2013 on the application of subjective and objective criteria to the individualization of the regime of execution of custodial sentences (duration of conviction, conduct, personality, degree of risk, age, health, identified needs and possibilities of social reintegration of the convicted person). However, the practice has revealed certain aspects some of which we will exemplify in the study, in case of change of the detainee’s legal situation, which the legislator did not take into account or ignored at the time of adoption of the execution law, and for which he did not issue transitional provisions either, so that, in respect of the institution of the enforcement regime, a number of problems of interpretation and application of the law arise, aspects that have remained unregulated even today, neither by law, nor by appeals in the interest of the law, situations generating non-unitary practices, starting right from the record offices within the places of detention. -
The more favorable criminal law principle was not implemented in a unitary manner in time. Doctrine-related conceptions were different, substantiating either the idea that only a law as a whole may be favorable, or the idea that favorable provisions of distinct laws may apply to a concrete case. The author defends the supremacy of more favorable criminal law over all the criminal law principles and believes that a more favorable rule may be corroborated with another rule regarding the content of the crime, without generating the lex tertia. The author also states that the more favorable criminal law principle should govern all the sequences of the criminal lawsuit, initiated upon the perpetration of a crime and extinguished by the perpetrator’s total rehabilitation. -
Inconveniences of neighbourhood are regulated autonomously in Article 630 of the new Romanian Civil Code, as judicial limits of the right of property. The paper analyzes the inconveniences of neighbourhood in the light of the relation to the abuse of right, because it has been for a long time the main instrument of settlement of the conflicts arisen in the state of neighbourhood. In this regard the author emphasizes that, unlike the abuse of right that involves, in all its forms of manifestation, the existence of guilt and the illicit act, by engaging the tort civil liability, the inconveniences of neighbourhood oblige the owner to provide reparation only if they are abnormal and are produced by the normal and licit exercise of the right. The foundation of the obligation to repair the created inconvenience is equity, the only one that can adjust to the conditions required by the legal situation specific to abnormal disturbances of neighbourhood. By applying equity, the court sets the judicial limits in the exercise of property, separate from the legal limits or from the conventional ones, expressly regulated by the new Civil Code, for private interest. -
According to the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter GDPR), in each Member State of the European Union, one or more independent supervisory authorities of personal data processing must operate under conditions of full independence. Therefore, by this article we aim to achieve two main objectives. A first objective is to explain the notion of „full independence” and the second objective is to find and analyze some of the essential elements for guaranteeing full independence. The methodology used has focused on the study of the European and national legislation (the European treaties, the GDPR, the Romanian Constitution, the Administrative Code), on the study of doctrine and on the analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter CJEU) on the issue of full independence of the supervisory authorities. This paper concludes that the notion of the independence of the supervisory authorities is a fragile notion that requires the full attention of the Member States. The fundamental human rights and freedoms must survive any political movements or commercial interests. The Member States, by the national law, must ensure adequate safeguards to ensure full independence of the supervisory authorities and must establish effective rules on the sanctioning of those who infringe on their independent status. As the notion of independence is a fragile notion, in the future, the Member States’ actions to safeguard the independence of the supervisory authorities must increase in direct proportion to the degree of risk of the new technologies to privacy and to the other fundamental rights and freedoms. Regarding the structure of the paper, in the Introduction, we discussed the necessity of existence of some national data protection authorities. In Section II, we briefly presented certain general considerations about supervisory authorities. In Section III, we set out certain general considerations about the legal regime of the autonomous administrative authorities in Romania. In Section IV.A we analyzed and defined the notion of „full independence”, and in Section IV.B we extracted from the legislation, doctrine and case law a part of the essential elements for guaranteeing a full independence and we briefly explained these elements. -
The independency or autonomy of public servants in construing and applying the law is warranted by the Constitution or by law. By virtue of the independency or autonomy, public servants construe and apply the law according to the own beliefs, being entitled to reject any interference from authorities or persons. Errors of public servants in the process of construing and applying the law can result in their non-criminal legal liability, if the conditions of such legal liability are fulfilled, as the case may be, civil tort or contract, disciplinary, material, taxation or contravention liability, in no case criminal liability for the offence of abuse of office provided by Article 297 (1) of the Criminal law. -
In a period of significant turmoil in the judicial system, both at the institutional and at the conceptual level, marked by severe controversy rather than by the unity of opinion, re-discussing the constitutional positioning of the Prosecutor has become a common theme. Hierarchy is interpreted as a by-product of the political influence, and independence as a form of undermining the unity of action. The study seeks to demonstrate that the principles of subordination and independence are consistent with the organisation and functioning of the Public Ministry system and that these are not antithetical, but antinomical principles. Their concurrent operation is a dominant trait in other judicial systems in European countries.
