Loading...
  • Following the conclusion of the Arbitration Convention there are born a number of contractual relationships between all participants in such Convention, namely: the Arbitration Agreement (between litigants and arbitrators appointed by the same); the Arbitration Cooperation Agreement (in the case of Institutional Arbitration, between arbitrators and the permanent arbitration institution); the Agreement on the Organization of Arbitration (between the Parties and the Arbitration Institution). In the above study there are reviewed the legal issues of the three Agreements, subsequent to the conclusion of the Arbitration Convention mentioned above, namely: The Arbitrators’ Agreement, Drafting Arbitration Agreement and the Agreement on the Organization of Arbitration.
  • The study hereby was inspired by a recent Case where the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled upon a petition for a preliminary ruling covering the interpretation of the provisions of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of April 5th, 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts made under Article 234 EC (now Article 267 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union). Taking our stand upon the issues highlighted by the aforementioned case, namely the possibility of cancellation of an arbitration award by the Court of enforcement and implementation ex officio of the European Union Law by the national court, it should be laid down some clarifications relating, mainly, to the ECJ solution with reference to the principles of the European Union Law, as well as national issues regarding the subject of the enforcement act, the possibility to pursue an appeal against the arbitration award, the principle of availability governing the lawsuit, but also the res judicata of judgments. The authors critically analyze the judgment and bear in mind the relevant Romanian law (including the provisions of Law no. 134/2010 on the new Code of Civil Procedure), and the possible effects in national, arbitration or judicial jurisprudence.
  • Law no. 85/2006 on the insolvency procedure, under Article 138, ties to rules the cases and the conditions under which managerial or supervisory staff of the debtor (legal entity), facing insolvency, is to answer patrimonially for having caused the state of insolvency of the relevant debtor (legal entity). In practice, in relation to this wording, it was raised in case law the question whether those by right can make such a request (on grounds of Article 138), subsequent to the occurrence of closure of the insolvency proceedings (under Articles 131-137 of the same Law). The author argues – bringing arguments to that effect, that it is required a positive response.
  • The new Criminal Code, bringing numerous novelties in the sphere of incrimination of the Romanian Criminal law, sets forth under Article 284 the sanctioning of an attorney’s act or of a person acting as representative in a legal business for failure to defend, in good faith and fairness, the rights and interests of the person represented, with the view to discriminate in favour of another person, with opposing interests.
  • 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 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.
  • 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 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”.
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