-
Lately, within the penal lawsuit – in the stage of its prosecution and judgment – due to the impasse of producing evidence facing the prosecution, since the prosecutor issues solutions for not initiating the penal prosecution without factual or legal grounds, with regard to the delator that perpetrated deeds provided by the penal law and closely connected with the crimes for which they ordered the judgment of others, they heard and then obtained that such delators be heard as witnesses and grounded its accusation on their testimonies. The clarification of the capacity in which a delator may be heard within a penal lawsuit appears, therefore, necessary both from a theoretical point of view, and from a practical point of view, and the authors’ approach is trying to respond to this necessity. -
Government Emergency Ordinance No. 71/2009, serially amended and supplemented by Government Emergency Ordinances Nos. 18/2010 and 45/2010 established that Court decisions that became enforceable until December 31, 2009 and that concern salary rights to the benefit of the personnel from the budgetary sector shall be paid by budgetary authorities and institutions as follows: 34% in 2012; 33% in 2013; 33% in 2014, of the value of the enforceable title. The author considers that Government Emergency Ordinance No. 71/2009 (as amended and supplemented) does not infringe Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as the applicable jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. -
In this study there are analyzed, in particular: – The influence of the European Court of Human Rights on the international movement of foreign judgments; – The enforcement of foreign judgments according to the new Romanian Civil Procedure Code; – The enforcement of judgments pronounced in a Member State of the European Union. -
How firm the authority of the state should be and how wide the margin of freedom of the citizens of a state should be are questions without a convenient answer for either the state, or for the citizen. This is a truth that can be insisted upon for a long time, but without satisfactory results. The citizen has always demanded from the public power a sphere of his freedom as wide as possible and the public power has been and is, in principle, ready to retain an extra authority over the citizen. The author aims in this study to show that both the authority of the state and the vocation of freedom of the citizen must slide between reasonable and legitimate limits, so that the state can exercise its role and social functions established through constitutional norm and put in the service of the common good of the society and that the citizen can enjoy, without any illegitimate restraints or restrictions, a freedom (recognized and guaranteed by the state), which allows him to develop his personality and dignity as a human being, in the general interpersonal relations and in its relations with the state, in a determined social-historical, economic, political, cultural, religious context, etc. The author also shows that the relationship between authority and freedom is in its essence a fragile one, in which the state may have, in certain political circumstances or of other nature, leviathan temptations, with oppressive effects on the constitutional freedoms, a position from which it reproduces tools of force in ever new forms and it restricts the exercise of the citizens’ rights. The author draws attention to a serious social danger that threatens the foundations of a democratic government: the excess of authority and its repeated, illegitimate and unjustified use can be premises of the establishment of an authoritarian regime, in front of which the citizen is powerless. The excess of authority and the unlawful violation of public liberties call into question the democratic character of the state. In its turn and also in certain given political or social circumstances, the associated citizen or citizens may be tempted to resort to extreme forms of manifestation, claiming a higher degree of individual or collective freedom, to the detriment of the original authority of public power. -
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. -
Dignity of human being is one of the most obvious and complex notions which lawyers had to study thoroughly in the last years. The complexity of dignity arises from its almost non-legal nature: dignity is a fundamental attribute of the human being or a postulate of civilization of which law should take note. It can not be conceived that dignity can be denied or that legal order ignore it. As an expression of human value, dignity tends to be confused with the notion of humanity. The presence of a principle of dignity in our legal order is undeniable; but respect for a person’s dignity can also reveal itself as a subjective right, as shown in Article 72 (1) of the Civil Code. Having in view the uncertainties arisen in the debates around dignity, the authors’ approach is an attempt to reflect, on the one hand, on the conceptual notion of dignity by the analysis of the object and of the legal nature of dignity and, on the other hand, on the functional point of view which allows to determine what dignity serves for; in other words, the functions of dignity and its practical applications. The regulation of the right to dignity in the Civil Code should be regarded as a timely novelty. -
What seems relevant to this study highlight is the current trend of Europeanization guarantees the right to a fair trial in civil matters established by art. 6, paragraph 1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and relativization constitutional provisions to guarantee this right, from the perspective of European Court of Human Rights. With this approach, the study proposed open a complex and complete vision, but not exhaustive approach guarantees within the current right to a fair trial in civil matters. Following an outline Key – are analyzed successively three major parts of the study, namely, 1. Identification of universal standards and regulations contained in the European human rights and, of Romanian constitutional and legal regulations on the right to a fair trial in civil matters. 2. Doctrinal guidelines on the requirements of the right to a fair trial in civil matters. 3. Jurisprudential guidelines on the requirements of the right to a fair trial in civil matters. -
Recently (re)invented (2005) by the Italian and North American law schools, quickly developed and initially submitted as a „science a little bizarre” (J.-B. Auby, 2007), the global administrative law is one of the legal results of the phenomenon of globalization. Introducing an increasing porosity of the borders, and also a considerable development of the functions of the non-state actors, increasingly diverse and numerous, globalization creates new phenomena of adjustment, involved in the development of transparency and that contribute to the accountability of each intervener on the supranational stage. This is the background of the emergence of a global administrative law, based on a new and systematic analysis of the supra- and trans- national phenomena, mostly heteroclite in appearance. In only a decade, around these precepts, an authentic school of thought has been crystallized, developed especially in common law doctrine, less exploited in French doctrine, and its presence finding its beginning in the Romanian doctrine by this study. -
In this study the author develops and substantiates the thesis according to which under reign of King Carol I (1866-1914), despite the clear purports of the Romanian Constitution of 1866 (inspired by the Belgian Constitution of 1831), in reality, illa tempore, there was no real democracy in Romania, a real representative government, but political and constitutional life was dominated, de facto, by moderate monarchical authoritarianism of King Carol I, King who was concerned to impose a personal direction in domestic and foreign policy of the country, with the view to render functional mechanisms of the young Romanian state, and that even at the expense of sacrificing real democracy and the parliamentary regime, proclaimed by the Romanian Constitution of 1866. -
In the general context of the biodiversity preservation and of the protection of nature, an important issue shall remain that related to the animals’ rights, as a way of defense and preservation of this essential component of biodiversity. The author reveals that recognizing and guaranteeing these rights shall remain, however, a process in full development, extremely difficult and complex, which supposes to take into consideration certain different values: ethical, biological, environmentally friendly, legal, and so on. Its current stage of development is the result of certain overlong evolutions, is characterized by certain aspects and expresses a series of trends of future developments. However, the continuous and most of the times improvised adjustments and readjustments feed the legislative chaos and implicitly, a contradictory case law in the matter. -
As compared to the former civil enactment which established a special immovable property privilege of architects, entrepreneurs, stonemen and other workers employed to build, rebuild or repair edifices, canals or other works, the new Romanian Civil Code provides a legal real estate mortgage for architects and entrepreneurs who have agreed with the owner to build, rebuild or repair a building. Beyond a slight restriction of the scope of application, the Romanian legislator has opted for a simplification of the conditions of recognition of the legal guarantee, which is praiseworthy and useful for the practice. However, the lapidary drafting of the normative texts does not provide answers to all the questions that the practitioners may ask themselves. The author has attempted in this paper to provide an image as accurate as possible of these questions, with the mention that the most important is the need for a fast answer (from the legislator or from the doctrine) to the question whether this legal mortgage guarantees only the payment of some amounts of money or also of any other type of claim which could represent the price of works contract. The issue essentially and immediately affects the scope of application of the guarantee and, consequently, a solution is required in order to ensure the predictability necessary for the economic circuit.
-
The court having territorial jurisdiction to trial the parole requests, the requests for the amendment of sentencing enforced by final judgments, the requests for interruption of the execution of prison sentence, the appeals to the execution filed by convicts in detention, as well as appeals lodged by prisoners against the hearing reports of the appointed judge for the execution of sentences, is set under the provisions of Article 449 para. (2), 450 para. (1), 456, 460 para. (1) and (6), 461 para. (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 25 para. (6), 74 para. (5) and 77 para. (3) of Law No. 275/2006 on the execution of punishments and measures ordered by the judiciary in criminal proceedings. Sector 4 Bucharest Court, judging claims like the ones mentioned above, lodged by prisoners in the penitentiaries Bucureºti Jilava and Spital Jilava - prisons that are not located within its jurisdiction - pursuant to the Order of the Minister of Justice No. 1279/C/2000, administrative regulation not published in the “Official Gazette of Romania” and issued pursuant to a statutory provision, currently expressly repealed, breached the laws of jurisdiction, assuming a jurisdiction that, legally, falls upon other court. Also, on account of the Bucharest Court judging, in the first instance, as Court of execution, requests made by prisoners in the same prisons, after November 1st, 2011, date on which Ilfov Tribunal started to operate, had violated the legal rules governing its territorial jurisdiction.
