The crime committed with two forms of guilt, as a form of the legal unit of the crime, has given rise over the time to different controversial debates due to its mixed structure. A special place is held by the possibility of the secondary party’s existence, this possibility being accepted by most of the authors, as well as unanimously in the judicial practice. The authors of this paper developed for the first time three conditions of the secondary party’s existence to the crimes committed with two forms of guilt for retaining this form of participation easily in the future judicial practice. The non-fulfillment of any of the described conditions produces different legal consequences for the participants; however, the detention of the secondary party to the crime committed with two forms of guilt shall be excluded.

Audit services is based on two premises: (i) companies must be able to choose their auditors according to their needs and at a reasonable cost and (ii) investors must be able to rely on an independent audit opinion based on an audit of high quality before investing in a company. It is in the public interest to ensure a sustainable audit function and, consequently, a competitive market for audit firms. Usually, a person invests in a company only once, in advance, has analyzed an audit report relating to the financial condition of that company. If, then, there is a failure of the enterprise (such as eg bankruptcy) that has earlier cases and unidentified audited by the auditor in place its civil liability issue. The question is to set a limit on the civil liability of auditors so that, on the one hand, to ensure fair compensation to those injured (investors), and on the other hand, auditors to take such risks reasonably.

In the regulations of the new Criminal Code, the legislator has not opted for a limited criminal liability of the legal entity, but for a general liability which may result because of the commitment of any criminal offence. Except the state, the public authorities and the public institutions which carry on any activities not representing the subject matter of the private field, the other legal entities may hold the capacity of active subject, no matter the nature and the seriousness of the committed criminal offence. The criminal liability shall be laid upon the legal entity only when the respective entity having a position of management, provision, decision etc. commits the deed set forth by the criminal law in carrying out the business line or in the interest or on behalf of the legal entity. In case of committing a deed set forth by the criminal law, both the criminal liability of the legal entity and of the natural person who contributed to its commitment or only of one of these two categories of persons.

The paper proposes to examine, based upon a comparison, the system of the appeal for annulment and of the motion for revision, according to the new Code of Civil Procedure and to the prior regulation, in the light of the principle of the right to a fair trial in due and foreseeable time. Considering the nature of the appeal for annulment and the motion for revision of the extraordinary remedies, also the principle of the legal relationships security is emphasized, which requires that the final and irrevocable court orders could not be put up for discussion, except in the presence of certain “fundamental flaws”, set forth by law expressly and in a restrictive manner. The paper describes the amendments and the supplements brought by the new Code of Civil Procedure and in so far as they meet the needs of the issues which received several interpretations in the practice under the regulation of the Code of Civil Procedure of the year 1865, such as the period for the exercise of the appeal for annulment or, on the contrary, they may generate a non-unitary practice, such as the obligation to assist/represent by a lawyer in the matter of the means of appeal related to the withdrawal.

This paper makes a detailed examination of certain essential provisions in relation to the preparation of the contract. The examination is focused especially on the novelty issues entered by the Law no. 287 of 17 July 2009 on the Civil Code which repealed the Civil Code of 1864 into force until 30 September 2011. The author proposed an examination based upon rigor and objectivity in his attempt to understand the true meaning of the provisions of the new regulations. To this end, the doctrine and the case law in the matter are taken into consideration, and especially the solutions for each issue under discussion are filtered by the domestic and external case law. Likewise, references are made to the legislations of other states, which represent sources of inspiration for the editors of the new Civil Code, for the purpose of understanding accurately the provisions related to the conclusion of the contract. At the same time, certain debates of the doctrine and case law are briefly examined as regards the interpretation given to certain provisions introduced in the new Civil Code and, as the case may be, a critical analysis is carried out as well, in relation to these issues.

Prin decizia Curții Constituționale nr. 190/2008, publicatã în „Monitorul oficial al României”, partea I, nr. 213/2008, dispozițiile art. 362 alin. (1) lit. a) teza a II-a C.pr.pen. – potrivit cãrora „apelul procurorului în ce privește latura civilã este inadmisibil în lipsa apelului formulat de partea civilã, cu excepția cazurilor în care acțiunea civilã se exercitã din oficiu” – au fost declarate constituționale. În consecințã, apelul declarat numai de procuror cu privire la latura civilã este admisibil, inclusiv în cazul în care motivele de apel referitoare la latura civilã au fost formulate oral în ziua judecãții, potrivit dispozițiilor art. 374 C.pr.pen. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția penalã, decizia nr. 2755 din 11 septembrie 2012).