The review is the only legal remedy that can be declared against the judgments of first instance pronounced by the administrative contentious sections. The former regulation of the Civil Procedure Code established that the review is devolutive, only inso far as the reviewed judgment cannot be contested by appeal. At present, being an extraordinary legal remedy, the review can only concern grounds of illegality of the judgment pronounced by the court of first instance. The present study has as object the analysis of the grounds for cassation listed by the Romanian legislator in Article 488 of the Civil Procedure Code from the perspective of the matter of administrative contentious. Thus, each ground for cassation will be briefly analyzed separately, from the perspective of applicability in the processual stage of review carried on before the administrative contentious courts. The analysis contains explanations of the normative texts, as well as examples from the national judicial practice, in which the R omanian courts have applied the grounds for cassation corresponding to the cases brought before the court. The aim of the research is to identify in the national practice the applicability of the grounds for cassation listed by the legislator and to present their effectiveness, following that, in the concluding part of the study, possible remedies regarding the currently existing grounds for cassation be proposed.

The idea of recognizing nature’s legal capacity, with the consequence of attributing this entity of rights, began to be conveyed some time ago in the specialized literature. With all criticism, the theory has taken a certain shape and has even been included in the legislations, as is the case of Ecuador, which in 2008, by Constitution, Articles 71–74, recognized the law of nature, of the environment in general. Bolivia has adopted legal provisions, but not with constitutional power and, at the same time, has proposed a draft Universal Declaration of Nature Rights, which quickly gained adherence both at the level of states and in specialized literature with moderate optimism because it is stated that „we must be aware that the statement such as the one proposed cannot be expected to have immediate results”. The granting of rights to nature, as a new approach to the law of the environment that conceptualizes the natural, non-human world, as something worthy of protection for its own good, and not just as something that can be used for the benefit of the people, appeared in response to the failure of the model anthropocentric environment protection, also has its place in interesting processes.

In a modern society, which faces many challenges, from the perspective of complying with the legal rules in force regarding the payment of taxes and duties owed to the state, in which the electronic means of payment and, mostly, the system of payments in virtual currencies, not very strictly regulated nowadays in any part of the world, it is necessary to take special legal measures to control and reduce socially dangerous deeds, such as tax evasion, money laundering, the appropriation by state officials of immeasurable assets, from doubtful sources, unverified or even illegal. The Romanian society has also not been exempt from such legislative and organizational concerns, especially since the specific challenges of an emerging and developing society and in correlation with good European practices have been much more pronounced. From this perspective, the Romanian legislator has designed an ingenious system of control and disclosure of assets acquired under conditions that exclude the justification of their sources of funding by the beneficiaries of these values, being integrated a legislative and administrative system for submission by the civil servants of some asset declarations and an organizational set for carrying out thorough verifications, by a specialized institution, called the National Integrity Agency (hereinafter referred to as ANI). However, in order for the ANI notifications not to unnecessarily burden the role of the courts of appeal in the country, by the Law No 115/1996 for the declaration and control of the assets of dignitaries, magistrates, of some persons with management and control positions and of civil servants, corroborated with the Law No 144/2007 on the establishment, organization and functioning of the National Integrity Agency and with the Law No 176/2010 on the integrity in exercising public functions and dignities, amending and supplementing the Law No 144/2007 on the establishment, organization and functioning of the National Integrity Agency, as well as amending and supplementing other normative acts, it was conceived an integrated institutional framework, through which ANI notifies the relevant cases from the perspective of unjustified assets to a specialized structure, integrated in the system of each court of appeal, called the commission of investigation of assets, which performs a preliminary verification of the evidence attached to the ANI notification and it can take the measure of notifying the court of law with this notification, if the origin of the assets acquired by the civil servant is unjustified, it may close the case, if the source is justified, or it may order the suspension of the control and the referral of the case to the competent prosecutor’s office. The present study intends to reveal the multiple valences of the acts of one of the most specialized institutions for verification and control of the assets of dignitaries and civil servants from Romania.