-
Asociația Internațională de Filosofie a Dreptului și Filosofie Socială (I.V.R.)1 a fost înființată în anul 1909 la Berlin, ca „Asociația Internațională pentru Filosofia Dreptului și Filosofie economică” și redenumită apoi, în 1933, „Asociația Internațională pentru Filosofia Dreptului și Filosofie socială”. I.V.R este cea mai veche, cea mai mare și importantă organizație în domeniul filosofiei dreptului și filosofiei sociale. Reorganizarea I.V.R. pe secțiuni naționale a fost decisă la Viena în 1959. Astăzi, I.V.R. are mai mult de 40 de asociații naționale membre (între care și asociația națională română), cu peste 2000 de membri în întreaga lume. Asociația este înregistrată, în temeiul legislației germane, și are sediul în Wiesbaden. Scopul său principal este de a sprijini și de a promova filosofia juridică și socială la nivel național și internațional. I.V.R. organizează congrese mondiale, la fiecare doi ani. Publicația oficială a I.V.R. este o revistă internațională, Archiv für Rechts-und Sozialphilosophie. -
Ever since the date of its publication in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, the Law No 241/2005 has become a highly debated law in the doctrine, many of its articles underlying inhomogeneous judicial decisions. Article 10 of the above-mentioned Law was one of the Articles which excelled by its lack of predictability, a fact which lead to raising a large number of pleas of unconstitutionality. Over time, its applicability has received some clarifications however, even today, some aspects still raise controversies and continue to lead to an inhomogeneous judicial practice. For this reason, the author believes that the intervention of the High Court of Cassation and Justice would be more than welcome.
-
In this study, starting from a decision of the Bucharest Court of Appeal, the author examines two important aspects in the field of labour relations. On the one hand, he speaks about the incidence of the legal obligation of loyalty exclusively during the performance of the individual labour contract and, on the other hand, about the possibility of the court properly seized to judge the application of the employee on challenging the dismissal decision, although the decision in question did not contain accordingly all the elements required by Article 252 (2) of the Labour Code.
-
In the practice of the courts there is a controversy on the problem of determining the litigants in the cases regarding the contestation against execution in relation to the sanction of performing a community service activity, whereas the prescription of execution of that sanction has occurred. This study, after stating all the facts, gives a solution therefor.
-
This paper deals with the problems of establishing the garnishment when the debtor is the Romanian State itself. The analysis is carried out in the light of the provisions of Article 5 (1) of the Government Emergency Ordinance No 146/2002, republished. At the same time, it is also analyzed the lack of incidence of the provisions of the Government Ordinance No 22/2002 in case of this debtor.
-
Introducing the provision on the administrative measure of non-voluntary hospitalization, provided in Article 315 (2) e) of the Criminal Procedure Code, has created confusion with regard to the cases in which this measure applies and to the cases in which the safety measure of medical hospitalization applies and, likewise, with regard to the jurisdiction of the court which orders one of these measures to be taken.
-
With the entry into force of the current Criminal Code, the Romanian legislator has eliminated the mixed regime of sanctions made of punishments and educational measures, provided by the old criminal regulation, in favour of a regime of sanctions exclusively consisting in educational measures. By this study, the author subjects the provisions specific to the educational measures involving deprivation of liberty regulated by Chapter III of Title V of the Criminal Code to a thorough analysis.
-
In the context of the new legal framework existing after the entry into force of the Law No 85/2014, this study analyzes the final table of claims and the contestations against it, by emphasizing the notable differences as compared to the old regulation – the Law No 85/2006 – and the importance of the final table of claims over the debtor’s estate in the insolvency procedure, as well as the exceptional character of the contestations against it. The registration of claims in the final table of claims against the debtor’s estate is generating rights for the creditors, and, consequently, the analysis and the thorough study of how this is produced, of the content of the final table of claims, of the time of its registration and publication, as well as of the rights and obligations of the participants in this procedure are essential. The contestations against the final table of claims have an exceptional character and the conditions in which these may be formulated are strictly, expressly and limitatively enumerated by the law. Under these circumstances, this legal remedy is approached from the perspective of the persons who may have the legal standing to file the contestation, from the perspective of the time limit for their submission – which appears as a highly opportune legislative novelty for the stability of the procedure – and, finally, from the perspective of the exceptional situations which may lead to the admission of such contestation.
-
In this study, it is analyzed the direct action of the mandator against the sub-mandatary, in light of the new Romanian Civil Code (the Law No 287/2009, republished on 15 July 2011). In this respect there are examined successively: the direct action in the legal relations arising from the contract of mandate, both under the old Romanian Civil Code (of 1864, in force until 30 September 2011) and under the influence of the new Civil Code (in force since 1 October 2011); the liability of the mandatary towards the mandator; the problem whether the mandatary and the sub-mandatary are jointly liable or not; the effects of the direct action of the mandator against the sub-mandatary and others.
-
In this study, the author makes an analysis of the provisions of Article 2319 of the new Romanian Civil Code, which entered into force on 1 October 2011, a text according to which „the personal guarantee ceases to exist following the death of the personal guarantor, although there is a contrary stipulation”, in relation to the general rules of principle of the Civil Code regarding the death of a contracting party (the natural person), respectively the cessation of the capacity of use (in case of the legal person). It is mentioned that the solution regulated by Article 2319 of the Romanian Civil Code did not exist in the previous Romanian Civil Code (of 1864), being taken from the Civil Code of the Province of Québec (Canada).
-
Contestația în anulare împotriva deciziilor rămase definitive în recurs, prin care a fost invocată încălcarea principiului non bis in idem, se judecă în conformitate cu dispozițiile noului Cod de procedură penală în materia contestației în anulare. Cazul de contestație în anulare, prevăzut în art. 426 lit. i) din noul Cod de procedură penală, referitor la ipoteza în care „împotriva unei persoane s-au pronunțat două hotărâri definitive pentru aceeași faptă”, nu este incident, dacă faptele cu privire la care s-au pronunțat două hotărâri definitive de condamnare sunt diferite, neexistând identitate de faptă, indiferent dacă încadrarea juridică a faptelor este aceeași. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția penală, Decizia nr. 1479 din 29 aprilie 2014) -
The entry into force of the EU Regulation No 1215/2012 brings an important element within the process of evolution designed to ensure the free movement of judgments on the territory of the European Union: suppression of the exequatur. Given that, under the influence of the Regulation No 44/2001, the first judgment delivered in the Member State of enforcement was precisely the declaration of enforceability (or the exequatur), changing the enforcement procedure within the Regulation No 1215/2012 has also brought, necessarily, a reform of the system of legal remedies. Without studying thoroughly the fundamental conditions which can lead to the refusal of enforcement, this paper aims at analyzing the main amendments which the new regulation brings in the matter of legal remedies which are available to the debtor in the Member State of enforcement, trying to make an adjustment of the case law of the European Court of Justice in the matter, to the new wording within the Regulation No 1215/2012, as well as an analysis of the compatibility of the measures adopted by Romania in view of applying the Regulation No 44/2001 on the declaration of enforceability in relation to the new system proposed by the European legislation now in force.
