-
Hardship (as grounds for contractual amendment or termination thereof, even in default of contractual provisions in this respect) had not been legally regulated under the former Romanian Civil Code (dated 1864), but only under some special laws. However, during the past two decades, there was shaped in legal doctrine and the Romanian reference jurisprudence a theory of hardship (as shown), which substituted, in part and controversially, the legal deficiency in the matter. This deficiency wore away by the entry into force of the new Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009, republished on July 15th, 2011 and enforced on October 10th, 2011), which, by a single fundamental wording (Article 1271, entitled „Hardship”) regulates the conditions under which the Court may rule, where appropriate, upon the adoption of a contract or even termination thereof „should the performance of the contract become excessively burdensome due to an exceptional change of circumstances that would make manifestly unjust the binding of the debtor to the execution of its duty”. In the study above, the authors make an analysis of the configuration of hardship in the light of Article 1271 under the new Civil Code. -
In order to highlight the civil liability structure, as ensuing from the wordings of the new Civil Code, enacted on October 1st, 2011, the author makes the synthesis of the theories of French doctrine developed in this issue: the theory of civil liability unity, the theory of civil liability duality and the intermediate or eclectic theory. Likewise, there are paraphrased discussions taking place at present, in the French doctrine as well, on the existence and relevance of contractual liability. The author presents thereafter echoes that these theories and discussions had within the framework of Romanian doctrine and jurisprudence during the last century. Acting towards the analysis of the wordings under the new Civil Code regulating civil liability, it is concluded that their editors have adopted our contemporary doctrine theory, under which civil liability is unique in its essence, and dual under the legal regime applicable to it. Therefore, following the criterion of the legal system, the well-known dichotomy is preserved: tort liability and contractual liability.
-
Cererea în despãgubire din valoarea cauțiunii este o cerere contencioasã, care presupune examinarea elementelor rãspunderii civile delictuale sub aspectul exercițiului abuziv al acțiunii, al prejudiciului produs și al legãturii de cauzalitate dintre paguba pricinuitã și conduita procesualã a pãrþii, competența de soluționare a unei astfel de acțiuni patrimoniale fiind reglementatã de dispozițiile generale cuprinse în cartea I din Codul de procedurã civilã (Înalta Curte de Casaþie și Justiție, Secția comercialã, decizia nr. 4170 din 30 noiembrie 2010). -
The concept of complex offence is not defined by law, excepting a few European legal systems, such as, for instance, the Romanian and Italian legislation. In the majority of legislations, the term complex offence is approached only by the specialty literature, like the cases of German, Spanish or French law. Non-regulation of the institution of complex offence through a legal provision has however resulted in an uncertainty with respect to its content, as the authors have different opinions regarding this matter.
-
The article includes some considerations regarding the procedural dispositions concerning the purpose of criminal lawsuit, as regulated in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The author analyzes the dispositions of the new Code of Criminal Procedure which establishes the purpose of the rules of criminal procedure, by reference to the dispositions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in force where the purpose of criminal lawsuit is established.
-
The social reaction against low severity felonies ask for finding solutions alternative to criminal penalties. The legislator of the new Criminal Code, waiving the institution of absence of the felony’s social danger and replacement of criminal liability, has adopted, for the argument of criminal prosecution, on grounds of the principle of opportunity of exercising criminal action, the institution of waiver of criminal prosecution, and, in terms of substantive criminal law, waiver by the court law of the penalty enforcement. Both institutions, new as concepts in the Romanian criminal legislation, are practically instruments of non-penalization of the actual felony and replacement of criminal liability with an administrative liability, by enforcing administrative sanctions as alternatives for criminal penalties. The regulation of these new institutions, according to the author’s opinion, can however be criticized both in terms of preserving the rights of the injured persons and by the fact that the prosecutor’s assessment powers are far more extended than those of the court of law.
-
In the new Civil Procedure Code, a great number of court decisions remain final in the appeal in tribunals or courts of appeal, and there is no procedural way to fight against illegal or unfounded decisions. Given the judicial realities of our country, it is speculative to believe that the enforcement of the NCPC will automatically stop tribunals and courts of appeal from pronouncing illegal or unfounded decisions. Therefore, it is only natural that an adequate regulation is adopted, by the reintroduction of the action for cancellation as a last remedy for the correction of illegal or unfounded decisions. Although the action for cancellation proved its utility, it was eliminated from the Civil Procedure Code, by the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 58/2003, amending and supplementing the Civil Procedure Code. The parties in the trials for which the decisions remain final in the appeals filed with various tribunals and courts of appeal do not have access to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, and in these circumstances illegal or unfounded decisions are not submitted to the judicial control of the latter. The requirement to correct illegal or unfounded judgements passed by the courts of law is provided by art. 6 § 1 in the European Convention of Human Rights, art. 1 par. 3 and art. 124 in the Constitution, moral rules and the precepts of the Holy Bible, the sacred book of Christianity, according to which all deeds and actions of people must be based on truth and justice.
-
The present study analyzes a series of civil procedure aspects – both in the light of the current Code of Civil Procedure, still in force, and in the light of the new Code of Civil Procedure (Law no. 134/2010, but still unenforced) – that are debatable, concluding that, for instance: z Sending a cause for retrial can only take place within the limited situations set forth in the Code of Civil Procedure (when the merits has not been investigated or trial has been made in the absence of the party illegally summoned). z Absence of the notice of adjournment of the pronouncement or not signing it can not be assimilated to non-investigation of the merits; z Absence or not signing the minutes represents a non-investigation of the merits; z Suspension of the court order execution, appealed by means of extraordinary appeal procedures shall be judged in the same composition by which the appeal is settled; z In order to establish the exercise of parental authority it is compulsory to enclose the social investigation report to the court case.
-
The present article focuses on the legal liability, having as main character the company administrator and presenting an overview of the the sanction specific to the administrator non-patrimonial liability:the administrator revoking. Concomitantly, the problems occurring in the legal practice are also taken into consideration: decision-making competence and the juridical control of the revoking decision. Due to the intuitu personae character of the mandate, the revoking of the company administrator, even when abusive, is final. So, in practice it was stated that the mandate, even arbitrary withdraw, can not be held in justice against the principle‘s will, the only right the proxy has is the claim damages, but not reintegration, as the trust representing the graunds for the mandate can not be imposed. Also, an administrator can not reguest reintegration but, if abuses were committed, by withdrawing the mandate, the administrator has damage claim. In the situation in which the administrators have been appointed by the article of incorporation, their dismissal presupposes its amendament. That is why, the court can not order the administrator‘revoking, as it would mean the modification of the articles of incorporation. In the condition in which the administrator acquired this quality by the company‘s articles of incorporation, his dismissal does not only have the character of an revokingl but it also represents an amendament of the articles of incorporation. The article also includes a detailed analysis of the opinions expressed in the speciality literature and the solutions in the legal practice for the administrator revoking problem.
-
The termination of synallagmatic contracts with execution uno ictu represents a common cause in the judicial practice for the annulment of agreements which generates reinstatement of the parties in the former condition, by mutual restitution of the considerations executed by each of them. When the agreement is transferable of property, as consequence of the reinstatement of the parties in the former condition, the asset returns from the acquirer’s to the allienator’s patrimony, the latter having the obligation to return the delivered performance. In case a precautionary measure is established over the acquirer’s patrimony, such as distraint, the asset is frozen, thus being questioned if it can be discharged from the acquirer’s patrimony as consequence of termination. The author estimates that such thing is possible, because such discharge is not voluntary, but forced, as the pros and cons are detailed in the content of this article. Moreover, there is a series of procedural aspects that must be taken into account by the court of law invested with the settlement of such termination request.
-
The present study proposes to analyze the issue of civil guilt, in both of its forms (tort and contractual), judging that the selection of the Civil Code s applicable guidelines (the new Civil Code, in force as of October 1st 2011, as well as the previous Civil Code) from the amalgam of jurisprudential solutions and doctrinaire directions is highly important. The exploration of the Civil Code ks texts brings in discussion a current topic much debated by the contemporary doctrine: disappearance of the unity and harmony of civil liability, which is traditionally founded on guilt. The coexistence of the hypotheses of subjective civil liability with those based on the idea of risk, warranty or equity, within the context of modern society, evidences the increase of the remedial role of civil liability, to the detriment of the sanctionable role. The attention focuses on the victim ks position, to be indemnified, being less important, within the area of civil liability, the sanction applicable to the offender. In the last part of the study, the author expresses her belief that, despite inherent difficulties, undoubtedly, at this moment, the guilt still remains „the eternal lady of tort liability”.
-
With rare exceptions, self-explanatory, the legal adages have proven out to be law constants, that are so enfranchised and widely accepted that, often, they have been converted from ,,rules” to ,,arguments”. Jurisprudence has capitalized them and is still capitalizing them either in the consideration of ,,their inherent binding legal force”, since, in their essence, they are objectified through legal rules, hence borrowing their value, either in the consideration of ,,their normative force” k within the newer meaning assigned to this concept k as ,,reference”, as ,,guidance”, as ,,standard” of interpretation and enforcement of the provisions of positive law. Two of these adages present a paradoxical and arguable legal circumstance: specialia generalibus derogant (special departs from general); nemo censetur ignorare legem (ignorance of the law excuses no one). They are not established in terminis (in terms) and sufficiently defined by legal dispositions. And, still, they have a binding legal force. These are, in essence, the subject matters proposed to be discussed in the study below.
