-
Sintagma „poate fi primit în profesie” folositã în art. 16 alin. (2) din Legea nr. 51/1995 privind organizarea și exercitarea profesiei de avocat conferã consiliilor barourilor – ca organe de conducere ale organizației profesionale – o competențã specialã, un drept de apreciere în legãturã cu primirea în profesie, cu scutire de examen, în cazul persoanelor enumerate limitativ de lege. -
The development of the legal framework for public procurement in the European Union represents a very important issue which presents numerous challenges. The starting point of the evolution of legal aspects in public procurement was the year of 1962, when the institutions of the European Community at that time underlined the importance of the regulation of this aspect for making the common market operational. In this respect, they militated for eliminating commercial restrictions inside the Community among the member states by making operational the freedom to establish and the free movement of services. Originally, public procurement represented a non-tariff barrier in the development of the common market, thus opening the way toward the harmonization of this field by the European Commission among its member states, including Romania. The previously mentioned legislative process was divided by the doctrine of the public procurement law in 4 stages which describe the evolution of public contracts for goods, works and services.
-
Law No. 221/2009 regarding political convictions and their related administrative measures issued in the period comprised between March 6, 1945 – December 22, 1989 established, inter alia, that the victims of such convictions shall be entitled, within an interval of 3 years from the enforcement of this law (June 14, 2009) to request the Romanian State to pay moral damages (without any ceiling in terms of value) for the suffering caused by such convictions. The law was subsequently amended, in the sense that a ceiling was established for the value of such damages. In its first two decisions (No. 1358/2010 and No. 1360/2010), the Constitutional Court stated that both the original and the amended text of the law are unconstitutional, without denying, however, in principle, the fairness and lawfulness of granting such moral damages in the given situation. Until the present time, the Romanian State did not proceed to enact Law No. 221/2009, in consideration of the mentioned decisions issued by the Constitutional Court, although it was bound by the Constitution to proceed as such. Taking this situation into account, the author sets forth the idea that, at present, although we are apparently in the presence of a legislative void, the injured parties may claim, however, such damages in court, even at this time, on the strength of certain principles from the Constitution of Romania, from the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
-
The author is dealing with the issues related to the postponement and interruption of the execution of penalty by imprisonment and by life detention according to the new Criminal Procedure Code. The study contains a comparative analysis of the new provisions and of the provisions in force both from the point of view of the doctrine, and of the jurisprudence in the field.
-
This paper is a review of the provisions set forth in Art. 216 of the Criminal Code, which focuses on questionable theoretical and practical aspects, especially on the question of criteria for distinguishing between the offences of found property appropriation and theft offences. Likewise, the author makes a comparative analysis of the provisions of Art. 216 of the Criminal Code, reported to Art. 243 of the new Criminal Code. -
Law no. 202/2010 regarding some measures aiming at the celerity of cases’ settlement establishes, inter alia, a number of important (fundamental) amendments and completions to the Family Code and the Code of Civil Procedure in force in relation to dissolution of marriage through divorce under parties’ agreement. The study hereby reviews – comprehensively – amendments and completions in question, highlighting in relevant cases some critical approaches on the new regulations.
-
The entry into force since January 1st 2011 of the Framework Law no. 284/2010 on uniform remuneration of staff paid from public funds and of Law no. 285/2010 on remuneration in 2011 of staff paid from public funds brings again to the fore the thorny issue of staff remuneration in the public sector. Fructifying the experience gained in 2010 through the implementation of the Framework Law no. 330/2009, now repealed, the aforesaid enactments regulate principles on remuneration, pay system, base rates’ setting and differentiation (pays, wages in terms of position and monthly allowances according to employment), benefits, bonuses, allowances, compensations and premiums that the public sector staff shall capitalize on, as well as legal liability and proceedings in disputes’ settlement. In this context, essential are also milestones set by the Constitutional Court via resolutions passed on issues of principle on the possible intervention by the legislator in matters of staff remuneration in the public sector.
-
In the study under the above title, the author analyzes the legal regime of movement of privately owned land through sales agreements, focusing mainly on registration and formal requirements for a period of approximately 200 years (the early nineteenth century until the present day) Interest in the study is evident in which there were not only significant differences in time but also in space, the legal regime differing essentially between the “Old Kingdom” (Oltenia, Muntenia, Moldova and Dobrogea) and “Transylvania” (Ardeal, Banat, Crisana, Satmar and Maramures) annexed to Romania in 1918.
-
Review of judgments in civil proceedings is, together with the appeal for annulment, the chance for a final procedural possibility for a “remedy” legal solution so that, ultimately, an irrevocable court decision is consistent with normative propositions incidents to that legal dispute. Often, this extraordinary means of attack is not, as commonly, a “reverential” one anymore, but is “aggressive”, based upon the urgent requirement of retrial as a consequence of “passing final and irrevocable judgments in violation of the principle of Community law priority, governed by Art. 148 para. (2), in conjunction with Art. 20 para. (2) of the Romanian Constitution, republished” as stated in Art. 21 para. (2) of the Administrative Litigation Law no. 554/2004. Review mechanism, as put into operation, focuses on controversial or debatable issues, some unpublished. In this study, the authors note to identify and comment on some of the aforementioned.
-
Under current Romanian law (via multiple enactments), authorized translators and interpreters (who translate legal documents of any kind), have no legal knowledge in practice frequently, but philological only (for the foreign language they are duly authorized), whereas Romanian legislation in the field (quite bushy) does not provide for the authorized translator / interpreter a law school graduation as a condition sine qua non. Hence, there are a number of serious complications in practice. Such being the case, the author suggests that those who shall be authorized as translators / interpreters (of legal documents or to legal effects), either hold a degree in law (LLB) or at least having completed relevant specialized courses (possibly at the Romanian Notary Institute).
-
Acțiunea în daune-interese care vizeazã antrenarea rãspunderii civile delictuale a AVAS în temeiul art. 998-999 C.civ. nu atrage aplicarea dispozițiilor legii speciale cu privire la competența curții de apel în primã instanțã, ci pe cele ale art. 1 pct. (1) lit. a) din Codul de procedurã civilã, fiind vorba despre un litigiu patrimonial de drept comun (Înalta Curte de Casație Justiție, Secția comercialã, decizia nr. 1896 din 21 mai 2010).
-
The author of the study above, consistent with a part of the jurisprudence (but inconsistent with another) holds that, in light of Art. 28 of Law no. 54/2003/ the Union Law) not just the union (within the unit the employee works at), but also the higher level trade union organization (federation, confederation, trade union) can sue on behalf of union members, part of the federation, confederation or trade union. Once started an action as such, the organization acquires not the status of the applicant, but only acts as a representative of the applicants employees (union members, holders of claimed rights). Admittedly, if subsequently to proceedings’ promotion, the unionist employee gives up the case, the trade union organization (trade union, federation, union) can not carry forward proceedings anymore.
