-
Selling land outside built-up areas has a specific regulation in Romanian law, often derogatory from the general provisions applicable in the field of selling goods, as regulated by the Romanian Civil Code. This specific regulation is comprised in Law No 17/2014 concerning some regulatory measures in case of selling agricultural land located outside the built-up area and for modifying the Law No 268/2001 on privatising commercial societies which administer state owned public and private property lands, destined for agricultural needs, act which suffered a series of important modifications by the Law No 175 from 14 th August 2020. This legal modification from 2020 implements a series of important legal changes related to the holders of pre-emption rights, but also concerning the specific modalities of selling agricultural lands located outside the built-up areas, when the holder of pre-emption rights does not want to buy. Also, in each case when the court is asked to give a decision which supersedes a selling contract, the petition is admissible only if the pre-contract is legally signed, according with the Civil code provisions and all other legal requirements are fulfilled, meaning: obtaining all necessary authorisations, respecting the pre-emption right, respecting the fiscal and land registration requirements. The law also clarifies how the pre-emption procedure works and how it is controlled by the state authorities. -
Un element care trebuie avut în vedere atunci când se abordează problematica disciplinei Drept parlamentar este frecvența utilizării acestui termen în literatura de specialitate, precum și în programele studiilor de licență sau masterat ale facultăților cu profil juridic, ori ale unor facultăți de științe politice, în care disciplina Dreptul parlamentar s-a studiat și, poate, se studiază încă, ca disciplină/materie de sine stătătoare. Chiar și în limbajul comun termenul de drept parlamentar este suficient de bine încetățenit, ceea ce poate da naștere unei percepții publice eronate, asupra autonomiei sale, ca ramură individuală a sistemului de drept, față de alte ramuri ale dreptului, și, în mod deosebit, față de dreptul constituțional ...
-
Due to the pandemic shaking the world in 2020, law enforcement and military authorities also faced the serious strain of often new or substantially larger than usual volumes of assignments. The workload of border police, public security, immigration authorities and administrative bodies has increased radically, but the Armed Forces are also strongly involved in performing the tasks. During the state of emergency and the following health crisis declared in Hungary, legislative rules differing notably from the „normal” legal order were introduced, affecting our daily lives, work, relationships, and of course, the lives and services of the officers working for the authorities subject to our study. In this document, we analyse the major changes affecting the „armed” sector within the legal framework related to the pandemic, and – due to its dogmatic interest – the hospital command system developed for the increased protection of healthcare supplies is also covered -
The premises for the adoption of the Decree No 195/2020 on the establishment of the state of emergency in Romania were the evolution of the epidemiological situation in Romania and the assessment of public health risk for the next period, which indicates a massive increase in the number of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, having regard to the fact that failure to take urgent, exceptionally social and economic measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection among the population would have a particularly serious impact, mainly on the right to life, and, in the alternative, on the right to health of individuals
-
The study addresses the issue generated by the express regulation of the principle of loyalty in matters of evidence, especially from the perspective of the incidence of the sanction of exclusion of evidence in the cases where this principle has been violated. The author notes that, in general, legality and loyalty in the administration of evidence means the idea of honesty which the judicial bodies must show when constructing evidence, and the violation of these principles generates the solution of applying the sanction of exclusion of evidence. In addition, the article deals also with an aspect of these problems that has not yet received a unitary solution in the national doctrine and case law, respectively that of the existence of a conditionality between the incidence of the sanction of exclusion of evidence on the fault of judicial bodies in the illegal administration of evidence. With theoretical arguments and with examples from the practical activity of the courts, the author shows that the solutions are, on the one hand, in the sense of excluding evidence, and, on the other hand, in the sense of validating them, the court rulings being determined in these cases precisely by the finding of the good faith of the criminal investigation body.
-
This doctoral research investigates the case law development of the principle of loyalty within the framework of the invisible constitution theory. Uncodified counterpart of written constitutional rules, the invisible constitution belongs to a broader understanding of the concept, specifically the constitution in its material sense. Contemporary examples are found within the British constitutional order (e.g. constitutional conventions and case law), the French bloc de constitutionnalité (i.e. complementary unwritten rules) and the case law of the Hungarian Constitutional Court (i.e. the Sólyom model). Assuming a national invisible constitution exists, the paper aims to demonstrate that the principle of loyal cooperation belongs to such an invisible dimension of the Romanian constitutional order.
-
As it is well known, the insolvency procedure involves the collaboration of the insolvent company, of the syndic judge, of the creditors and, of course, of the judicial administrator. Once the state of insolvency is established by the court, one of the first steps is to assess the debts of the insolvent company, and this action can be done only by communicating the state of insolvency to the creditors, in order to allow them to record their claims to the company. At this stage, an important role is that of the judicial administrator, who must work with all those involved in the procedure in order to determine the amounts owed to the creditors. The judicial administrator is not limited to receiving the creditors’ requests. He must analyze each claim, must establish the amount claimed and ascertain whether that claim is based on a valid title
-
Donația poate privi nu doar un bun determinat în materialitatea sa, ci și o universalitate de bunuri prezente și viitoare, precum și o fracție determinată ori determinabilă din patrimoniul donatorului. Prin urmare, contractul de donație era perfect valabil între părți, producând efecte juridice erga omnes (prin formalitățile de publicitate realizate în acord cu art. 58 din Legea nr. 7/1996, în forma inițială, câtă vreme pentru terenul pentru care se emisese titlul de proprietate conform Legii nr. 18/1991 nu exista carte funciară deschisă, ci doar mențiune în registrul de transcripțiuni). Faptul că donatarul a dispus asupra cotei sale determinate din terenul care urma a fi supus procedurii de ieșire din indiviziune nu invalidează liberalitatea, fiind în mod evident că odată cu partajul – convențional sau judiciar – cota parte dobândea doar atributele de materializare fizică (existența ei fiind însă certă de la momentul nașterii stării de indiviziune).
-
The article deals with the issue of inappropriate conditions of detention in the Romanian penitentiary system and the available internal means of appeal. The objectives of the article consist in determining the content of the notion of conditions of detention, the deficiencies of which led to the violation of Article 3 of the ECHR/Convention, the analysis of the applicable internal remedies and of the relation between these from the perspective of obtaining monetary compensation for inappropriate conditions of detention, and the establishing of the effects of the state of necessity on the State’s obligation to ensure appropriate conditions of detention
-
This article underpins the normative framework given to judicial bodies competent to make investigations into marine navigation in Romania, according to the provisions of the Romanian criminal law, followed by a brief history of the establishing and dissolving of the courts in Romania regarding maritime and river matters, and examination of the normative framework given to the competencies of the Court of justice on investigations into marine navigation, and finally this article is drawing some conclusions and implications related to lex ferenda.
-
The present study analyses from the point of view of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) a topic of current interest in the Romanian law, namely the topic of the legality of evidence as a link between the rule of law and the right to a fair trial. By corroborating general principles and individual solutions emerges a differentiation mechanism used by the ECHR in order to distinguish between possible breaches of the domestic law in respect to their nature and degree. While in principle the way the law is interpreted and the breach of law allegedly committed in obtaining and presenting the evidence are by themselves irrelevant from the perspective of the fair trial, the arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable interpretation of the law, which violates the principles of the rule of law, is relevant from that perspective. A serious breach of law can mean the inadmissibility of the evidence obtained thereby. The ECHR doesn’t lay down general rules regarding the assessment of the arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable character of the interpretation of the law and, respectively, the seriousness of its breach, but from the case-law emerges a series of relevant criteria, such as the manifest error of assessment, the breach of law committed in bad faith or systematically, inevitable discovery of evidence and the purpose of law.
-
The present paper aims to bring to your attention the Decision No 9 of 6 April 2020 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice – Panel for the settlement of some matters of law that took into account the legal nature of the revenues collected at the Environmental Fund in order to determine whether the acts of theft in any way from the establishment of these fiscal burdens may fall under the provisions of the Law No 241/2005 for preventing and combating tax evasion. The mentioned decision established that the revenues of the Environment Fund that give rise to tax receivables are not fiscal receivables that may fall under the law to prevent and combat tax evasion, which can be considered wrong. The study presents all the legal arguments for which the interpretation given by the High Court of Cassation and Justice is wrong and, at the same time, harmful, considering the possible legal effects that this decision may have on all tax regulations in Romania.
