Loading...
  • The present analysis was carried out in order to clarify the situation in which the heads of claim do not have a clear and justified correspondent with the arguments presented in the statement of claim, as well as possible procedural solutions which can resolve such an issue. From the sources analyzed so far, it appears that there is no straight forward solution for this situation neither in the legal provisions, case law or speciality lectures. The premise of our study consists in the situation in which a claimant submits a request containing only one head of claim, although the content of the statement of claim includes also arguments and grounds which are not related to the one and only head of claim which was mentioned in the application, because they refer to different legal topics which are not properly expressed at the beginning of the statement of claim, as head of claim. The present analysis concerns the issues arising from the above mentioned situation both for the claimant and defendant, but also which are the remedies at their hand if such situations will occur. In addition to this, the study presents also the remedies available from the courts’ perspective if such a situation appears in different phases of the trial, but also the consequences of this situation if the issue is not addressed properly by the parties or by the court before the issuance of the court ruling.
  • The study examines the issue of unlawful interceptions and audio or video recordings made during preliminary acts, i.e. prior to prosecution; this is a common problem the case law courts are often faced with. The conclusion that interceptions and carrying out audio or video recordings prior to the start of a criminal trial are unlawful is produced by the author based on the analysis of the Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence on this matter and of power of res judicata accompanying the Constitutional Court’s judgments which is attached not only to the operative part, but also to the considerations underpinning it.
  • The study refers to the way in which national criminal processual legislation provides safeguards regarding the respect for the right to a fair trial, with particular reference to the obligation of the courts of law to properly motivate the solutions they pronounce in solving the merits or even the ordinary remedy of appeal. From the research made, the author concludes that the European standards do not find an explicit consecration in the current national legislation and identifies situations from the recent case law in which the courts have directly applied the European conventional provisions, by abolishing the sentences analyzed and sending the case for retrial by the same court even without Article 421 (2) b) of the Criminal Procedure Code providing such a case. The author proposes that it should be completed de lege ferenda the text itself previously invoked by including a case which should refer to the failure to provide proper motivation for the sentence of the court examining the merits and he continues the argumentation by proposing the extension in the same way also of the cases in which an review in cassation may be lodged against the decisions of the courts of appeal. The conclusion he reaches has in view the fact that the two legislative amendments would be likely to provide adequate safeguards to the right to a fair trial in criminal matters, without the need to resort to conventional provisions which should be conferred direct applicability, a solution often avoided by the courts in this field.
  • Potrivit art. 46 alin. (1) C.pr.pen., pentru motive temeinice privind mai buna desfășurare a judecății, instanța poate dispune disjungerea acesteia cu privire la unii dintre inculpați sau la unele dintre infracțiuni. Conform art. 421 pct. 2 lit. b) C.pr.pen., instanța, judecând apelul, pronunță una dintre următoarele soluții: admite apelul și desființează sentința primei instanțe și dispune rejudecarea de către instanța a cărei hotărâre a fost desființată pentru motivul că judecarea cauzei la acea instanță a avut loc în lipsa unei părți nelegal citate sau care, legal citată, a fost în imposibilitate de a se prezenta și de a înștiința instanța despre această imposibilitate, invocată de acea parte. Rejudecarea de către instanța a cărei hotărâre a fost desființată se dispune și atunci când instanța nu s-a pronunțat asupra unei fapte reținute în sarcina inculpatului prin actul de sesizare sau asupra acțiunii civile ori când există vreunul dintre cazurile de nulitate absolută, cu excepția cazului de necompetență, când se dispune rejudecarea de către instanța competentă. Articolul 6 paragr. 1 din Convenția (europeană) pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale (în continuare „Convenția”) stabilește că orice persoană are dreptul la judecarea cauzei sale în mod echitabil, în mod public și într-un termen rezonabil, de către o instanță independentă și imparțială, instituită de lege, care va hotărî fie asupra încălcării drepturilor și obligațiilor sale cu caracter civil, fie asupra temeiniciei oricărei acuzații în materie penală îndreptate împotriva sa. Potrivit art. 2 paragr. 1 din Protocolul nr. 7 la Convenție, orice persoană declarată vinovată de o infracțiune de către un tribunal are dreptul să ceară examinarea declarației de vinovăție sau a condamnării de către o jurisdicție superioară. Exercitarea acestui drept, inclusiv motivele pentru care acesta poate fi exercitat, sunt reglementate de lege. (cu notă aprobativă).
  • Potrivit art. 248 C.pen. din 1968, fapta funcționarului public ce, în exercițiul atribuțiilor sale de serviciu, cu știință, nu îndeplinește un act ori îl îndeplinește în mod defectuos și prin aceasta cauzează o tulburare însemnată bunului mers al unui organ sau al unei instituții de stat ori al unei alte unități din cele la care se referă art. 145 sau o pagubă patrimoniului acesteia se pedepsește cu închisoare de la 6 luni la 5 ani.
  • Through this material we tried to identify the reasons that were the basis for the adoption of Article 1622 of the Civil Code, through which certain third parties are protected from the effects of compensations potentially prejudicial to their situation. After exposing some preliminary considerations regarding the institution of compensation, we set out to present the main hypotheses that would be subsumed under this legal provision. Along with their evocation, we tried to extract the interests predominantly protected by the legislator, which justifies the blocking of the compensation. We believe that understanding these cases is essential for the fair application of Article 1622.
  • This article deals with an offence substantially amended under the new Criminal Code – i.e. the failure to comply with judgments. After a brief comparative presentation of new and old regulations, the author describes and analyzes the normative versions of the new wording: opposition to the execution, by making a stand against the enforcement authority; refusal of the enforcement authority to implement a judgment, by which it is bound to perform a certain act; refusal to assist the enforcement authority in the implementation of the judgment by people who are liable in this matter under the law; non-enforcement of judgment ordering the reinstatement of an employee; default in enforcing the judgment on the payment of wages within 15 days from the date of its enforcement application submitted to the employer by the interested Party; non-compliance of judgments on the establishment, payment, updating and recalculation of pensions; prevention of a person to use, in whole or in part, a property owned under a Court ruling, by the one against whom the same is enforceable.
  • Potrivit art. 349 alin. (1) C.pen., neluarea vreuneia dintre măsurile legale de securitate și sănătate în muncă de către persoana care avea îndatorirea de a lua aceste măsuri, dacă se creează un pericol iminent de producere a unui accident de muncă sau de îmbolnăvire profesională, se pedepsește cu închisoare de la 6 luni la 3 ani sau cu amendă.
  • This study aims to present the main amendments that were brought to the Labour Code in France by the Law No 1088/2016. The emphasizing of these amendments seems to be a relevant one, given the many similarities between the French and Romanian labour legislation and also the fact that even France, which had a traditional labour legislation, has amended it for the purpose of rendering more flexible labour relations. In order to emphasize the amendments brought, the study contains a few comparative references also with regard to the regulation existing until the adoption of this normative act. As a fundamental guideline, the rights of employers are increased, but there are also regulations favourable to the employees. A change of vision is noticed with regard to the roles of the sources of labour law, for the purpose of bringing to the foreground the collective bargaining at the level of unit, to the detriment of the legal norms and of the conventional norms at level of branch of activity.
  • Both in the Member States and at European and international level there are currently concerns for finding the best means of combating tax fraud and tax evasion. Recent measures place the good tax governance among the means of fighting against this phenomenon, and it is estimated that joint actions at European level are more effective, being meant to encourage also third countries to apply minimum standards of good tax governance. At the same time, the concept of good tax governance, as well as those of tax fraud and tax evasion are taken under consideration by the doctrinaires in the field of criminal and tax law, but the definitions given to them have been imprecise and sometimes contradictory. In this context, we intend to emphasize the contribution of good tax governance as an effective means to prevent and mitigate tax fraud and tax evasion both at national, European and international level.
  • Resulting from the frontal collision of two criminal law systems at the level of the legislation, theory and practice of criminal law, the crisis of the (science of) criminal law in Romania is a crisis of the „technical-legal method”. This crisis resulted from the lack of thoroughly analysing the foundations of this method configured in terms of general juridical theory in the context of the Historical School of Law from Germany, received in the particular matter of the theory of criminal law thanks to the contribution of the Italian criminal specialists (Arturo Rocco) and which became a traditional method of the Romanian science of criminal law due to its reception in Italy by Vintilă Dongoroz. In the broader plan of the general theory of law, the same crisis proves to be a crisis of the idea of science of law, explicable by the vicissitudes of the reception of the Historical School of Law in Romania over the last 150 years.
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