-
In this paper the author examines the legal regime of the plea of illegality regulated by Article 4 of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004, as this text has been rather recently amended by Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of Law No 134/2010 on the [new] Civil Procedure Code. In this regard there are examined: the definition and the legal nature of the plea of illegality, its features, as well as the conditions of admissibility of the plea of illegality. -
From the point of view of the legal content, the execution of the prison sentence under supervision represents the penultimate way as regards the difficulty of the execution regime, being more facile than the regime involving deprivation of liberty. This execution method disposed by the trial court produces immediate effects, so that the sentence imposed is not actually executed, however, during the supervision period, the person convicted must observe the supervision measures set forth by law, the obligations imposed by the court and to fully perform the civil obligations set forth in the judgment of conviction. If the person convicted does not commit any new offence and he/she complies the supervision measures and with the abovementioned obligations during the supervision period, this execution method produces final effects as the sentence imposed is deemed to be executed by operation of law. In exchange, in case the person convicted does not comply with the supervision measures set forth by law, with the obligations imposed by the court or with the civil obligations set forth in the judgment of conviction during the supervision period, the court is obliged to revoke the advantage of suspending the sentence execution under supervision and to dispose its execution by deprivation of liberty. If the person convicted commits a new offence during the supervision period, the trial court is obliged to establish the sentence for the respective offence, to revoke the suspension of the execution of the sentence under supervision and to apply the sentence according to the second offence rules or to the rules of the intermediary plurality. -
This paper analyzes the legal status of the Romanian judgments in terms of the European Enforcement Order, in light of the provisions included in Regulation (EC) no. 805/2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims; Regulation (EC) no. 1896/2006 creating a European order for payment procedure; and Regulation (EC) no. 861/2007 establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, all this, in conjunction with the rules of the new (Romanian) Code of Civil Procedure (Law no. 134/2010, republished on 3 august 2012 and entered into force on February 15, 2013). -
The problems of compulsory licences in the matter of patents has received a unitary regulation with the signing of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights – TRIPS Agreement. Likewise, the Doha Declaration (Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health) is an important legal reference point because it clarifies a number of practical aspects relating to the compulsory licences in the matter of new medicines both in terms of the production for the domestic market and the import of such products. In the context of the sharp rise in the prices of new medicines, as well as of the constant pressure on the public health insurance budgets, the mechanism of compulsory licences may represent for the patients a new way of access to the new innovative medical therapies. This article discusses the international and European legal framework, with a special focus on the legal regime of compulsory licences in Romania. There are also examined the experiences of other countries in this field, the way of determining the remuneration due to the patent owner, as well as the usefulness of these practices for Romania. -
In case of the minors aged between 14 and 18 years old, who are liable from the criminal point of view, the presumption according to which their judgment has not reached its maturation, but is in full process of development and stabilization is instituted. In view of these circumstances, minors under this category of age do not have the psycho-physical ability to fully become aware of the gravity of the perpetrated crimes and, especially, their injurious consequences on the social values protected by means of criminal regulations. Given this context, the author claims that the new Criminal Code excludes the possibility of enforcing punishments in case of under aged criminals and establishes a specific system of criminal penalties, entitled educational measures, classified into two categories: educational measures without deprivation of liberty and educational measures with deprivation of liberty. -
In the study with the above title, the author makes a comparison between the regime of pleadings’ invalidity settled under the (Romanian) Code of Civil Procedure in force (since 1865), yet successively amended and supplemented by a series of laws (including Law no. 202/2010 regarding some measures to accelerate the settlement process) and the new Romanian Code of Civil Procedure (Law no. 134/2010, published on July 15th, 2010, but still unenforced), underlining – in a positive manner – modern and flexible legislation, superior to the latter, pointing out, though – critically – the sketchiness and occasional ambiguity of the new Code. -
In the present study, the authors analyze extensively the situations of non-unitary practice that appeared both at the level of the Bureau of the judge of surveillance of deprivation of liberty and at the level of the courts, due to the different ways in which the magistrates understood to deal with the problem of the transfers of the persons deprived of liberty and the legal nature of the transfer decisions issued by the National Administration of Penitentiaries. The purpose of the present analysis is to clarify the regime applicable to requests made by the persons deprived of liberty to cancel the transfer decisions, because the lack of regulation in the Law No 254/2013 regarding the possibility of appeal, as well as of the competent court to resolve the appeals, led to the outline of divergent currents of opinion reflected in the non-unitary solutions given in complaints or appeals. -
The evolution of technology has facilitated the development of the so-called collaborative economy. Through collaborative online platforms, which „remove” the borders between states, various services such as short-term housing rental (Airbnb type), urban transport (Uber type), pet-sitting (PetBacker type), and others are provided. In Romania, the activities specific to the collaborative economy are in full development, in the context of the absence of some regulations specific in the matter. The purpose of the paper is to determine the role of the service provider in electronic contracts concluded through collaborative platforms and to which rules they must be subjected, taking as reference system the service provider with the habitual residence in Romania. It is analysed only the situation of service providers – natural persons, which can be grouped into two categories: a category of persons providing various services on an occasional basis, in leisure time, in order to obtain additional incomes (the so-called prosumers), category which is the basis of the collaborative economy, and the second category, which includes the persons who provide services on a regular basis, on a continuous basis, on their own and aiming at obtaining profit. The distinction between non-professional and professional service providers is difficult to achieve; there are no criteria in the legislation in the field of services for this purpose. The quality of professional or non-professional must therefore be analysed on a case-by-case basis, using the rules of the common law. The legal regime depends on the classification of the service provider into one category or another. The contracts in the collaborative economy are concluded by means of online collaborative platforms. Those operating in Romania mostly have their headquarters abroad, which awards international character to the contracts concluded. Using the regulations in force, there are analyzed the modalities to determine the law applicable to contracts and the authority competent to solve the disputes, which may arise between the service provider and the platform or between the service provider and their user. The study captures only a small part of the collaborative economy phenomenon and seeks to clarify some day-to-day situations, which can give rise to some complex legal problems. -
Within the study hereunder, the legal regime of joint ownership, in both its forms (common and temporary, respectively forced and perpetual) is analyzed, from a critical point of view, with special regard on the second type. The author analyzes the differences between the legal regime of these types of ownership established under the Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009, as republished) by comparison with the regulation of the Civil Code of 1864. The inconsistencies instituted under the new regulation, the illegitimate and unconstitutional nature of some of them, as well as the recent legislative amendments intervening in this respect are analyzed, all these being accompanied by examples extracted from the Romanian and foreign jurisprudence.
-
In this paper we intend to determine if the legal regime applicable to the superficies consisting in the right to build on the land of another is different from that prescribed for the superficies established on an existing building. Although it defines it in Article 693 (1), as a form of the right of superficies, the Civil Code does not contain provisions with special reference to the exercise of the superficies consisting in the right to build. Only in the event of ending of this special superficies due to the expiry of its duration, Article 699 (1) and (2) of the Civil Code provides for a regime derogating from the general rules of artificial real estate accession. In these circumstances, the powers of the superficiary who acquired the right to build on the land of another were indirectly inferred from the restrictive provisions contained in Article 695 (2) of the Civil Code, applicable to the superficies established on an existing building. The conclusion we reached is that, when superficies takes the form of the right to build, the superficiary enjoys a preferential treatment compared to that applied to the one who has acquired a superficies on existing buildings. This regime remains favorable in case of ending of the right of superficies due to the expiry of its duration, based on the special rules derogating from the general ones regulating artificial real estate accession established as a result of the ending of the superficies. The common rules applicable to both forms of the right of superficies were not tackled in this paper. -
-
