Loading...
  • Înscrierile în cartea funciară nu au caracter constitutiv/translativ, ci numai efecte de opozabilitate față de terți (art. 25 din Legea nr. 7/1996 arată că „înscrierile în cartea funciară își vor produce efecte de opozabilitate față de terți...”). Astfel, această lege asigură publicitatea imobilului și nu are efecte constitutive/translative ale dreptului de proprietate. (...)
  • Unele considerații asupra separării puterilor în stat. În literatura de specialitate se acceptă că doctrina separării puterilor în stat s-a dezvoltat în secole întregi de evoluție politică și filosofică1. Originea sa poate fi identificată în secolul al IV-lea î.H., când Aristotel, în tratatul său intitulat „Politici”, a descris trei agenții ale formei de guvernare: adunarea generală, funcționarii publici și autoritatea judiciară. Și în Republica Roma exista un sistem asemănător bazat pe adunarea generală, senat și oficialii publici, toate funcționând pe baza principiului „verifică și echilibrează” (checks and balances). După căderea Imperiului Roman, Europa a devenit fragmentată în state-națiuni și de la sfârșitul Evului Mediu până în secolul al XVIII-lea structurile de guvernare au constat în forme de concentrare a puterii, determinată de rațiuni ereditare. Singura excepție a perioadei este considerată dezvoltarea Parlamentului Englez (Parlamentul) în secolul al XVII-lea2.
  • Principiul Separațiunii Puterilor Statului, care a avut o influență considerabilă în viața și organizarea constituțională a tuturor Statelor moderne, și-a avut și el – ca și oricare alt așezământ omenesc – viața și destinul lui.
  • The article briefly analysis a series of implications of transparency principle in public procurement. Firstly, the article highlights a legal loophole determined by the absence of a legal definition of this principle in the main internal enactment. The practical applicability of this principle is shown both at the regulation level and the case law. To sum up, the transparency principle imposes drafting all the relevant information for an award procedure in a precise, clear and unequivocally manner and communication of the said information to all third parties. Transparency creates the premises of equality of treatment between bidders and subsequently allows an accurate verification of compliance with the said rules.
  • In this study, the authors are analyzing the protection of the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship in the European competition law, on the one hand, from the perspective of the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, and, on the other hand, from the perspective of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the union regulations in the field. The authors are also referring to the Romanian legislation in the field, as well as to the latest trends in the doctrine and jurisprudence regarding the tackled issue.
  • The issue of fighting corruption has been and still is a constant concern of the Romanian and foreign legal doctrine, as „corruption” takes various forms of manifestation punishable by criminal law as separate crimes. From this perspective, the author considers it useful to see the evolution of criminal law on fighting corruption in our country, by comparing the crime of corruption in the current criminal law with those regulated in the new Criminal Code. The article also emphasizes on the crime of buying influence, as a specific means of corruption crimes.
  • The Romanian State assumed by the New York Convention adopted on 10 June 1958 only the obligation to recognize and ensure the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the situation where the foreign arbitral award is pronounced on the territory of a signatory state of the Convention, and the dispute which has been settled by the respective foreign arbitral award may be qualified as being commercial by the national legislation. We appreciate that the Romanian State complied with this obligation by ratifying the New York Convention, by the Decree No 186/1961, and we emphasize, in this context, that the respective Convention is binding on the Romanian State only with regard to foreign arbitral awards that fall within its scope of application. Thus, for the foreign arbitral awards that do not fall within the scope of application of the New York Convention, the Romanian State is not bound by any conventional obligation, the state having the freedom to regulate legal provisions other than conventional ones regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Consequently, the existence of some domestic legal provisions contained in the Civil Procedure Code, other than the provisions of the New York Convention, on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, is in no way likely to engage international responsibility of the Romanian State, since, as we noted in this study, the Romanian State complied with its conventional obligations assumed by the conclusion of the New York Convention, even the provisions of the mentioned Convention (Article 7.1) allowing the existence of some national provisions other than conventional regulations, since only in such a hypothesis there is the possibility of invoking by the interested person the more favourable national provisions (if the normative provisions were identical, in no case could the problem of applying some more favourable legal provisions be raised).
  • In the above study, the author, carrying out a critical analysis of articles 1216–1218 of the new Romanian Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009, which became effective on the 1st of October 2011), namely, regarding the contents regulating the violence (as a vice of consent) in this Code, considers that their wording is not adequate and that is why finally, the study, de lege ferenda proposes a new wording of the contents, such as formulated by the author.
  • 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.
  • Expertise is the activity of research of certain facts or circumstances of the case, which requires specialized knowledge, activity carried out by an expert or, in the cases provided by law, by a specialist in a specific field, designated by the court at the request of the parties or ex officio, and whose findings and/or conclusions are reported in a written document, called an expertise report. As such, the expertise and the expertise report are two interdependent operations, since the expertise report is the follow-up of the expertise, its final act, and the expertise is the research activity on which the expertise report is based. Although the legislator establishes that the evidence can be provided, among others, by means of the „expertise” (Article 250, Articles 330–340 of the Civil Procedure Code), which constitutes the means of proof, from a legal point of view, is the expertise report, and not the expertise itself. The expertise can only concern factual circumstances on which the expert is asked to give clarifications or to ascertain them, circumstances which require specialized knowledge and which help to solve the case. The legal norms cannot form the object of the expertise, because the judges must know the law in force in Romania. However, the content of the foreign law is established by the court of law through „attestations obtained from the state bodies that have enacted it”, by „expertise opinion” or by another appropriate way [Article 2562 (1) of the Civil Code].
  • The motivated findings and conclusions of the expert or of the laboratory or specialized institute from which the expertise has been requested will be recorded in a written report. Exceptionally, when the expertise is carried out in front of the body that disposed/ordered its execution, the expertise report may be oral. The form of the expertise report also depends on the nature, as well as the specificity of the problem that generated the expertise. In all cases where the expertise requires time, documentations, travels, researches, analyses, laboratory tests, etc., the expertise report will take the written form. In case the expert can immediately express his opinion on the factual circumstance whose clarification requires specialized knowledge, he will be heard during the meeting, and his opinion will be recorded in a minutes, according to the provisions relative to the recording of the witness statement, which apply accordingly. As such, the expertise report is the document by which the expert informs the court of all the legally collected information which clarify (bring light on) the issues to be examined, being, therefore, the means by which the evidence is presented to the judge. The expert must limit himself to reporting what he has perceived, without expressing his opinion on the consequences of fact and of law that might result. The text of the report will include clear, short and dense phrases and sentences, using accessible vocabulary, without ambiguous formulations or terms and without references to proceedings outside the file. The technical terms, which are difficult to access, will be explained at the bottom of the page or in brackets, in order to facilitate the understanding of the conclusions.
  • The new Romanian Code of Civil Procedure (Law no. 134/2010, as republished on 3 August 2012 and coming into force on the 1st of February 2013) supersedes the previous Code of Civil Procedure (of the year 1865) regulating (in articles 303-320) the witness-based evidence. In this study the author makes a wide-ranging analysis of this regulation, from the triple perspective of the admissibility, of the administration, of the appreciation of this mean of evidence, comparing the new provisions in this matter by those set forth in the previous Code of Civil Procedure.
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