-
-
Active procedural quality and interest are essential conditions for promoting any action in court. The verification of the two conditions must be carried out from the outset, firstly, by the person or persons initiating an action in court and, secondly, by the court which is invested with resolving the action. The lack of one of the two conditions paralyzes the resolution of the action on the merits and attracts the rejection of the action, either as being introduced by a person lacking procedural quality, or as being without interest. It is not often that in the defenses formulated by the defendant the exception of the lack of active procedural capacity and the exception of the lack of interest are invoked at the same time. Concomitant invocation is often natural, as procedural quality and interest are two elements which, although not confusing, often justify each other. However, I have encountered in practice multiple situations in which the active procedural capacity has been justified by the applicant’s/applicants’ interest in promoting the action. On the other hand, there may be situations, less common in practice, in which the interest is justified by the procedural quality. Here that the two basic elements of any action or lawsuit are often indissoluble, and their concomitant treatment appears natural. That is why I considered it opportune to carry out a brief study on how the interest justifies the active procedural quality, with references to certain solutions encountered in judicial practice or to solutions that had as inspiration the invocation of exceptions, thus trying to argue which, on the one hand, the two exceptions are invoked together, most of the time and, on the other hand, why, in a particular way, the interest justifies the procedural quality. At the same time, the study includes a comparison between the situations in which the interest is analyzed as an exception and the situations in which the interest must be analyzed on the merits.
-
The loss of the chance to obtain an advantage or to avoid a damage represents a new form of reparation of prejudice regulated by the Civil Code, enshrined by the provisions of Article 1385 (4) of the Civil Code, and represents a distinct category of prejudice reparable by engaging in tort civil liability, which concerns those negative consequences directly caused by the commission of an illegal act that consist in missing the real and serious possibility of the occurrence of a favourable event for the victim’s life, which could have brought him fulfilment in his personal or economic life by the carrying out of some projects. Therefore, the loss of a chance means the loss by a person of the possibility to achieve a gain or, as the case may be, to avoid a damage, which may result in causing a prejudice to that person. De lege lata, we mention that the prejudice caused by the „loss of the chance to obtain an advantage” can be invoked within the framework of tort (extra-contractual) civil liability, but also in the field of contractual civil liability whenever by the non-fulfilment of the legal or contractual obligations such consequences have occurred. This prejudice could be claimed both by the direct victim of an illegal act and by those close to them if they prove that they suffered, through ricochet, such a prejudice. In order to have a reparable prejudice, the chance of occurrence of the favourable event for the victim must be as real as it is serious, which is assessed differently, whether or not the victim was in the process of taking the chance at the time when the event that compromised the possibility to achieve it occurred, and this prejudice must be in a direct causal link with the illegal act committed by the responsible person. The assessment of the chance shall be carried out in relation with two criteria, namely the examination of the circumstances in which the illegal act was committed, on the one hand, and the special situation in which the victim was at that time, on the other hand. With regard to the features of the prejudice, we specify that it must be certain (certain, unquestionable) and real (undeniable, effective, indisputable), and not an eventual one (possible, probable), the loss, therefore, must be actual. -
The continuation of the criminal trial is a form of exercising the right of defence through which, in the cases expressly and limitingly provided by law, the suspect or defendant causes an increase in procedural activity after extinguishing the criminal action in order to unequivocally establish his innocence. This procedure, which is the subject of this study, was established to guarantee the presumption of innocence of the suspect or defendant in the event that the criminal action is extinguished as a result of certain impediments provided by Article 16 of the Criminal Procedure Code. These impediments are: the existence of a cause of imputability, the intervention of the pre-conviction amnesty, the intervention of the prescription of criminal liability, the withdrawal of the preliminary complaint and the existence of a cause of impunity. These situations are limited. -
In this study, the author aims to highlight a number of limitations of the principle of availability in the second phase of the civil process, such as, for example, the need to approve enforcement by the court, the impossibility of representation of the legal person by another legal person, execution by persons or entities other than the creditor, as well as the imperceptible nature of certain goods. At the same time, this procedure cannot be initiated against those who enjoy immunity from enforcement, and the failure to register documents under private signature in the National Register of Real Estate Advertising was an impediment to enforcement until declaring the legal provisions of this obligation as unconstitutional. This presents the difficulties encountered by the holder of the writ of execution in his attempt to enforce it, as well as doctrinal and jurisprudential controversies, which led to the conclusion of the need to repeal the institution of approval of enforcement.
-
Against the background of the interpenetration of the forms of legal liability for the same illicit deed, whether it is criminal, administrative, contraventional or disciplinary liability, in conjunction with the case law of the European courts attributing criminal character to some accusations beyond the legal qualification of the deed in the domestic law, a double criminal liability may be reached, thus posing the problem of the cumulation of these liabilities in terms of respecting the right not to be punished twice (ne bis in idem). Although no matter can be an exception, the issue arises mainly in areas where there are various forms of liability in the domestic law and different authorities with supervisory and sanctioning powers, such as tax evasion, public order, forestry or environmental offences or, finally, labour protection, which is of interest here. Thus, in the field of safety and health at work, the employer’s liability in the event of accidents at work may be exemplary for such situations, given that he is liable for both a criminal liability incurred by the judicial bodies and a contraventional liability established by the special bodies of the labour inspection, following that our approach will address this issue in the context of the current case law of the European courts of law (such as Case A and B v. Norway, Grand Chamber of the E.C.H.R., or the C.J.E.U. cases, Luca Menci, Garlsson Real Estate SA and Enzo Di Puma, Consob). -
Legal arrangements pertaining to neighbours’ relationships are permeated by the idea of community. A textbook example is the right-of-way, which arguably breaches the sacred inviolability of private property in its quest to provide adequate access to the p ublic road for a landlocked parcel. The present paper examines the manner in which the Civil Code of Romania (2009) managed to bridge the unbridgeable, i.e., the individualist essence of private property and the collectivist flavour of neighbours’ relationships. Methodologically, this article debuts with a brief historical and comparative study of the right-of-way from the viewpoint of related legislations (i.e., the French Civil Code and the Civil Code of Quebec), it examines the terminology employed by the legislator and analyses the legal regime of said institution. The author argues that the cornerstone of this fine balance is the legal nature of the right-of-way: in denying it the stature of a real right (ius in re), the legislator established this sui generis right as a legal limit to the exercise of private property. Consequently, the right-of-way is solely a creation of the law, whereas only its manner of exercise can be settled by way of contract, continuous usage or court decision. Therefore, the author stresses the semantical inconsistency encountered within legal literature, which confuses the very origin of the right-of-way, which is inherently legal in its nature, with the concrete manner of usage, which the legislator left to the will of the contracting parties or the judge summoned in the event of litigation, respectively. In addition, the author argues that a land book entry may cover the right -of-way only in the form of a notation, and not as a compulsory registration, either permanent (intabulation) or provisional, since the latter two solely concern tabular rights, which solely consist of real rights on real estate.
-
-
In a modern society, which faces many challenges, from the perspective of complying with the legal rules in force regarding the payment of taxes and duties owed to the state, in which the electronic means of payment and, mostly, the system of payments in virtual currencies, not very strictly regulated nowadays in any part of the world, it is necessary to take special legal measures to control and reduce socially dangerous deeds, such as tax evasion, money laundering, the appropriation by state officials of immeasurable assets, from doubtful sources, unverified or even illegal. The Romanian society has also not been exempt from such legislative and organizational concerns, especially since the specific challenges of an emerging and developing society and in correlation with good European practices have been much more pronounced. From this perspective, the Romanian legislator has designed an ingenious system of control and disclosure of assets acquired under conditions that exclude the justification of their sources of funding by the beneficiaries of these values, being integrated a legislative and administrative system for submission by the civil servants of some asset declarations and an organizational set for carrying out thorough verifications, by a specialized institution, called the National Integrity Agency (hereinafter referred to as ANI). However, in order for the ANI notifications not to unnecessarily burden the role of the courts of appeal in the country, by the Law No 115/1996 for the declaration and control of the assets of dignitaries, magistrates, of some persons with management and control positions and of civil servants, corroborated with the Law No 144/2007 on the establishment, organization and functioning of the National Integrity Agency and with the Law No 176/2010 on the integrity in exercising public functions and dignities, amending and supplementing the Law No 144/2007 on the establishment, organization and functioning of the National Integrity Agency, as well as amending and supplementing other normative acts, it was conceived an integrated institutional framework, through which ANI notifies the relevant cases from the perspective of unjustified assets to a specialized structure, integrated in the system of each court of appeal, called the commission of investigation of assets, which performs a preliminary verification of the evidence attached to the ANI notification and it can take the measure of notifying the court of law with this notification, if the origin of the assets acquired by the civil servant is unjustified, it may close the case, if the source is justified, or it may order the suspension of the control and the referral of the case to the competent prosecutor’s office. The present study intends to reveal the multiple valences of the acts of one of the most specialized institutions for verification and control of the assets of dignitaries and civil servants from Romania.
-
In this study, the author intends to emphasize a number of rights by which the procedural availability is manifested in the phase of enforcement, whose purpose is to carry out the provisions contained in the enforceable titles. The initiation of the second phase of the civil trial, by notifying the court executor, as well as the moment of registration of the application for enforcement are of special importance. The principle of availability is also manifested by the abandonment of the enforcement procedure, the waiver of the claimed right, as well as by the possibility of the parties to find, by mutual agreement, convenient ways of exercising rights and of executing obligations, by concluding a mediation agreement.
-
Decree No 40/1953 marked the transfer of the competence to settle the non-contentious succession procedure from the courts to the former State Notaries. This competence was also maintained by the new regulation of the activity of notaries public, the Law No 36/1995. However, neither the aforementioned Decree or the Law No 36/1995 in its original version acknowledged the possibility for interested persons to resolve amicably those disputes resulting from the issuance of the certificate of succession without complying with certain legal provisions that could lead to its annulment. Starting with 2013, the litigants benefit from a new legal way of declaring the nullity of the certificate of succession, the present study proposing its analysis and also the comparison with the other procedure already established for annulling the certificate of succession, the judicial procedure. The two procedures led to lengthy debates in practice, given the double controversy over the legal nature of the certificate of succession and the legal regime of conventional nullities, the legislator of the new Civil Code indicating only the possibility of declaring a nullity through conventional means, letting the doctrine define its effects. We have chosen as the focal point of this research treating these controversies born in the judicial and notarial practice, both encountering some difficulties, for example, in qualifying the type of nullity invoked according to the interest protected by the violated legal norm or establishing who can file an action for the annullment of the certificate of succession. These issues determined us to try to answer the questions that have risen in the judicial and notarial practice regarding the succession procedure and the annulment of the certificate of succession, trying through this research to offer them the most suitable answers, taking into account especially the spirit of the law, without neglecting its letter. Thus, we mainly analyzed who can file an action for the annulment of the certificate of succession, the issue of the extinctive prescription of this action, as well as the regime of the amicable nullity applicable when the heirs agree on declaring the nullity of the certificate of succession.
-
