-
În peisajul jurisprudențial conturat după intrarea în vigoare a actualului Cod civil1, ne reține atenția o hotărâre2 pronunțată relativ recent de Secția a II-a civilă a Înaltei Curți de Casație și de Justiție a României în materia răspunderii civile delictuale a comitentului pentru fapta prepusului său, în funcțiile încredințate, care prin argumentele prezentate oferă o nouă perspectivă privind problematica atât de controversată din ultimele decenii privind natura juridică și fundamentul acestei ipoteze de răspundere. Deși datele speței se referă la o faptă ilicită săvârșită în anul 2005, fiind în discuție modul de interpretare a dispozițiilor art. 1000 alin. 3 din Codul civil din 1864, prin hotărârea pronunțată, Înalta Curte de Casație și de Justiție își însușește noua orientare propusă în doctrina noastră privind necesitatea recunoașterii caracterului direct, autonom și independent al răspunderii comitentului, în raport cu răspunderea prepusului său, precum și fundamentarea obiectivă a acestei răspunderi pe ideea de garanție, ideea de risc și ideea de echitate. -
Comprised in the study presented hereafter, starting from the abbreviated provision of article no. 46 from Law no. 8/1996 concerning the ordering agreement, the author analyzes from a critical point of view these provisions in relation to other provisions comprised within the special law, and also to those by the Civil code (Law no. 287/2009). The legal provisions referred to herein are digested by means of exemplifying case studies from internal, and European jurisprudence. Therewith, the author emphasizes the controversial points of view from the professional community belonging to well-known writers, and subsequently states personal opinions regarding the approached subjects.
-
The author carries out a detailed analysis of the legal content of the offense to establish an organized criminal group, referred to in art. 367 of the new Criminal Code. After characterizing the concepts of criminalization and the aspects of novelty in the text of art. 367, under the rules in force, are examined in detail: object of criminal protection, subjects, objective and subjective side, forms, terms and punishments stipulated by law. Complementary explanations address the links of this criminal offense with other crimes, and certain procedural aspects. Then, this incrimination rule legislative precedents and the solutions to be followed in case of transitional circumstances are highlighted. Also, the author does not hesitate to express his point of view regarding the constituent content of this criminal offense, its systematization, its nature, and to frame some solutions and ideas of his own in this regard. The end of this analysis presents several conclusions and proposals concerning the law that is to come into force regarding the setting out of the appropriate protection of social values this incrimination concerns, a uniform application of the purport and thus better administration of criminal justice in Romania.
-
Plea of breach of the contract which was unregulated in the previous Romanian Civil Code (of 1864) is expressly established in the new Romanian Civil Code (entered into force on 1 October 2011) in the two paragraphs of art. 1556 stating that, under the rule of the previous Civil Code, legal doctrine and jurisprudence have regained the role of developing the general theory concerning the plea referred to above. Given the above, the author of the study analyzes in detail: the definition, historical development and comparative law issues relating to the plea of breach of contract, the conditions for exercising this plea and its effects and, in the end, she also makes brief conclusions.
-
Intellectual work originality is the essence of copyright. But in fact, the level of assessment for the condition of originality – in consideration of granting protection – is a sensitive, fluid, controversial, and interpretable issue, etc. In the light of international and Romanian copyright legislation, this study aims to clarify a number of difficult issues, controversies regarding the literary work’s originality.
-
Personality’s rights are non-patrimonial rights, inherent to the natural person, in the sense that they are directly attached to and inseparable from the real man, and they serve to the free development of his personality. The new Civil Code regulates the following rights of the personality: right to life, right to health, right to physical and mental integrity, right to dignity, right to respect for private life, right to his own image, identification attributes of the natural person, and the right to dispose of oneself. They can be grouped in two categories: rights that protect the human body and its biological functions, and rights that protect moral values. The first category of rights is governed by three principles: the principle of inviolability of the human body (which may suffer certain exceptions); the principle of non-patrimoniality of the human body, and the principle of the priority of interest and of the good of the human being. The rights which protect moral values have a content determined by their relation to a series of generic notions, incompatible with a precise definition, such as freedom, honor, private life, respect, for which reason the Romanian lawmaker strove to contour such notions; as well as by the regulation of some of the deeds which may impair such rights. Some of the personality’s rights may suffer limitations, which are imposed either by the necessity to protect some major public values, or by the exercise of other persons’ similar rights.
-
The transfer of procedures in penal law represents a form of international judiciary cooperation, which entails the voluntary and provisional waiver by a State of its exercise of its own penal jurisdiction in favor of another State. The authors’ approach targets the determination of the legal treatment of the transfer of procedures in penal law, with a special reference to the procedural acts entailed by the delivery and takeover of penal procedures, as basic forms of such institution, as well as of its legal effects.
-
Democrația ca formă de organizare și de conducere a societății trebuie să se adapteze la noile realități impuse de tehnologia digitală, mai ales printr-un anumit tip de revoluție educativă și culturală în serviciul utilizatorilor. Așadar, democrația în epoca digitală presupune, în primul rând, recunoașterea unui drept fundamental de acces la spațiul digital pentru a se evita în acest mod riscurile unei rupturi digitale, în sensul utilizării acestuia de un număr restrâns de oameni – o elită cibernetică –, implicând toate avantajele ce ar rezulta pentru aceasta din folosirea rețelelor de informare și de comunicare, cum ar fi, de pildă, internetul. Prin urmare, beneficiile unei societăți cibernetice nu sunt reale decât dacă instrumentele informatice sunt pe larg difuzate și puse la dispoziția unui număr cât mai mare de indivizi umani. Într-adevăr, o e-democrație sau o e-administrație nu vor fi inovații relevante decât dacă un număr foarte mare de cetățeni va avea acces facil la acestea.
-
The study intends to present the doctrinal opinions regarding the definition of the prejudice, which represents a condition and measure of the civil liability, the tripartite classification of the prejudices into patrimonial, extra-patrimonial and bodily harm and the indissoluble connection with the concepts of reparation, compensation and indemnification, the own identity of the bodily harm and the ambivalent character of the reparation, either patrimonial and non-patrimonial. It aims to analyze the particularities of the three categories of prejudices, the personal and rebound character of the bodily harm, the conditions for the reparation of the patrimonial prejudices, the certain character of the prejudice and the mitigation of this requirement in the case of the prejudices caused by the loss of a chance, the direct character of the prejudice in correlation with the direct and indirect causal link, the personal and reasonably predictable character of the prejudice, the principle of full reparation of the prejudice and mora creditoris, as a cause of limitation of the debtor’s liability, the guilt, condition of the liability for the reparation of the prejudice. The author also analyzes the presumption of guilt in the contracts generating the obligations of result and the proof of guilt in the contracts generating the obligations of means, as well as the causes exonerating the liability, the classification of damages into compensatory and moratorium damages, the problem of cumulating the damages with the contractual remedies, the cumulation of the damages with the execution of the contractual obligations, of the cumulation of the damages between them and the foundation of their non-cumulation, the judicial evaluation of the damages and their updating, the sanctioning character of the penalizing interest related to the cash claims.
-
Prin instituirea Uniunii Europene, statele au limitat drepturile lor suverane în anumite domenii și au acceptat competența acesteia (exclusivă, partajată sau de a întreprinde acțiuni de sprijinire, coordonare sau completare a acțiunii membrilor). Față de reglementările europene specifice executării silite1, Directiva 93/13/CEE a Consiliului din 5 aprilie 1993 privind clauzele abuzive în contractele încheiate cu consumatorii2 nu prevede expres aplicabilitatea în cursul acestei etape a procesului civil. Cu toate acestea, Curtea de Justiție a Uniunii Europene a stabilit în jurisprudența sa3 că Directiva trebuie avută în vedere de instanțele naționale și în anumite litigii vizând executarea silită, pentru a fi verificat caracterul potențial abuziv al unor clauze în sensul acestui act normativ.
-
Potrivit art. 10 C.pr.pen. alin. (1), părțile și subiecții procesuali principali au dreptul de a se apăra ei înșiși sau de a fi asistați de avocat; în alin. (2) al aceluiași articol se prevede că părțile, subiecții procesuali principali și avocatul au dreptul să beneficieze de timpul și înlesnirile necesare pregătirii apărării; apoi, în alin. (3) se arată că suspectul are dreptul de a fi informat de îndată și înainte de a fi ascultat despre fapta pentru care se efectuează urmărirea penală și încadrarea juridică a acesteia. Inculpatul are dreptul de a fi informat de îndată despre fapta pentru care s-a pus în mișcare acțiunea penală împotriva lui și încadrarea juridică a acesteia, [...]; în sfârșit, în alin. (5) se prevede că organele judiciare au obligația de a asigura exercitarea deplină și efectivă a dreptului la apărare de către părți și subiecții procesuali principali în tot cursul procesului penal.
-
The present study aims to present a series of case law decisions in which the role and the activity of the central bank has proved to be insufficiently considered in depth by the Romanian courts. The application thereby, as regards the National Bank of Romania, of some legal provisions addressed to commercial banks, confusing the administrative review on the acts of the central bank with the administrative jurisdiction, overlapping restraints of the constitutional frameworks in which the National Bank has activated throughout its history, inconsistencies with the vision accepted at European level regarding the attributions and independence of the central banks are widely treated in an attempt to clarify the specific position that the central bank holds in the Romanian institutional landscape. There were presented some solutions from the judicial practice that highlight the need for doctrinal clarifications regarding the nature of the activity of the central bank, including from the European perspective. The importance of knowing them is determined by the significant effects that the correct or incorrect application of the norms and principles regarding the central bank can produce not only at the level of the administrative law, but also at criminal or economic level.
