Loading...
  • The author analyses crimes such as “Not helping a person who is in need” and “Preventing help” from the new Penal code, revealing, if the case may be, the similarities and differences as compared to the effective penal law. The last part of the article contains elements of comparative law, with reference to the approached theme.
  • In this study, the author, while reporting certain provisions of the new Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009) and of Law no. 71/2011 for the implementation of the new Code, as compared to certain provisions of the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 44/2008 regarding the performance of the economic activities by self-employed persons, believes that through Art. 11 of Law no. 71/2011, one has not granted legal personality to the individual and family enterprises regulated by the ordinance mentioned above, while on the contrary, through Art. 2324 (4) of the new Civil code (in force as of 1 October 2011), one has implicitly amended Art. 31 of the said Emergency Ordinance. Finally, the author opinionates that the “Monist” concept of the new Romanian Civil Code (namely, the cancelation of the trade law and the existence of a unique civil law, which also incorporates the former trade law) is more of a formal issue, not a substance one.
  • The current article examines the issue of the monitoring of the general revenues of the fixed assets (owned by the debtor), by the creditor according to the regulations included in Art. 789-801 of the new (Romanian) Civil Procedure Code (Law no. 134/2010), as compared to the appropriate provisions of the old (Romanian) Civil Procedure Code from 1865, which was successively republished in 1900, as well as in 1948. All in all, as it is only natural, usually, the new regulations are usually, as it is only natural, obviously superior to the previous ones.
  • The autonomous collaterals are regulated, for the first time, by the new Civil Code, within the personal collateral, together with the parent guaranty. The law allots them a small portion, equally essential and simple, so that they may have substance and legal identity. But their legal regime can be essentially revealed through the extension of the analysis to the regulations in the field. The uniform rules for demand guarantees constituted by the International Chamber of Commerce from Paris and the Convention of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law with respect to the independent guarantee and the stand-by letter of credit. The present paper analyses the legal regulation, the concept and the legal category of the autonomous collateral. The author’s objective is that of revealing its complexity as a legal fundamental instrument in the field of internal and international business.
  • The author, in the above mention study, makes a general analysis of Law no. 71/2011 for the implementation of Law no. 287/2009 regarding the Civil Code. In the author’s opinion, Law no. 71/2011 is an extremely valuable legislative act, which ensures very good conditions, not just the understanding and application of the new Civil Code (which entered into force on 1 October 2011), but also the “transition” from the previous Civil Code (from, 1865) to the new ones.
  • Constrângerea moralã, cauzã care înlãturã caracterul penal al faptei prevãzute în art. 46 alin. 2 C.pen., presupune îndeplinirea urmãtoarelor condiþii: sã existe o acþiune de constrângere exercitatã de o persoanã asupra psihicului unei alte persoane, prin ameninþare; ameninþarea sã creeze un pericol grav pentru fãptuitor sau pentru o altã persoanã, în cazul în care nu ar sãvârºi fapta prevãzutã de legea penalã; pericolul cu care se ameninþã sã nu poatã fi înlãturat decât prin sãvârºirea faptei prevãzute de legea penalã.
  • The article reviews the organized crime phenomenon, as cross-border and multinational crime. The first section substantiates the concepts, both from a doctrine-related and a legislative perspective. An important part in terms of content and scope is dedicated to the analysis of European policies and strategies, emphasizing the security strategy of the European Union. The last part presents certain solutions for fighting against the cross-border crime phenomenon.
  • Law no. 202/2010 on certain measures regarding the acceleration of the settlement of lawsuits, the so-called “small reform”, was adopted in order to accelerate the settlement of lawsuits, by ensuring the swiftness of procedures, both in criminal matters and in civil matters, even before the expected entry into force of the new codes (the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Civil Code, the Civil Procedure Code). In the field of criminal prosecution, certain provisions of the current Criminal Procedure Code were amended, with a view to ensuring swiftness by eliminating the provisions that required the court intervention for the revocation or termination of certain preventive measures if the prosecutor issues a decision for the non-initiation of court proceedings; however, no amendments were correlatively made to other provisions of the code in relation thereto. Therefore, certain disputes might arise in connection with the implementation of such texts of law.
  • The establishment of the European arrest warrant at the European Union level, which actually replaced extradition, is, without any doubt, an important success of the Member States in the fight against cross-border crime. The execution of a European arrest warrant by the relevant Romanian judicial authorities, in the case of cross-border crimes, involves several specificities of this type of crimes, with direct implications over the entire European judicial system. The specificities identified by the authors in the paper include the execution of the mandate, even when the double crime condition is not fulfilled, the possibility of the Romanian competent courts to order the execution of a European arrest warrant, even when the crime for which the execution is demanded does not have the same name as in Romanian, the possibility of the relevant Romanian court to order the execution of the European arrest warrant, even if the crime for which such execution is requested is not provided by the Romanian law, but the content of the crime provided by the Member State law has similarities with a crime provided by our legislation etc. The analysis also revealed certain aspects related to the need to amend and supplement the special law (and the European piece of legislation) that should in line with the European legislation in the field.
  • One condition of the status of repetition of an offence is the existence of the prior final order for conviction to imprisonment for more than 6 months, issued in the case of perpetration of an intentional crime. As regards the calculation of the time when the conviction order becomes final, the substantial criminal law rules shall apply. According to such rules, time shall not be calculated in hours, but only in days, weeks, months and years. Since a day expires at 1200 a.m., the perpetration of a new crime on the date when the previous decision becomes final does not entail the status of repetition of offence for the defendant, but the applicability of the institution of felonies in concert.
  • 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.
  • This study starts by a comparative analysis of the institution of the summons to pay (regulated by Government Ordinance no. 5/2001) and the procedure of the payment injunction (regulated by Government Emergency Ordinance no. 119/2007), and in the end proposes the unification of both pieces of legislation into a single one, equally applicable to civil and commercial obligations.
Folosim fisierele tip cookie-uri pentru a va oferi cea mai buna experienta de utilizare a website-ului. Navigand in continuare ori ramanand doar pe aceasta pagina va exprimati acordul asupra folosirii cookie-urilor. Daca doriti sa renuntati la acestea, va rugam sa consultati Politica de Utilizare a Cookie-urilor. Anumite parti ale website-ului nu vor mai functiona corect daca stergeti toate cookie-urile. Citește mai mult... Ok