-
The article presents the itinerary covered since the entry into force of the new Civil Procedure Code (15 February 2013) by the manner in which it has been regulated the execution of the arbitral judgment. Initially, the arbitral judgment had to be invested with executory formula for the purpose of being enforced. By the Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of the new Civil Procedure Code it has been eliminated the formality of investing the arbitral judgment with executory formula, which corresponds to the imperative to accelerate the enforcement of such judgments. In our opinion, the Law No 138/2014 amending and supplementing the new Civil Procedure Code has reintroduced, however criticizably, the procedure of investment with executory formula of the arbitral judgment, in view of enforcement. The author’s conclusion is that the legislator should have kept the elimination of the procedure of investment with executory formula of the arbitral judgment, thereby contributing to the simplification and the encouragement to resort to the arbitration procedure. -
The article analyzes the jurisdiction of the Romanian court to settle the divorce application in case of spouses, Romanian citizens, who do no longer reside on the Romanian territory. The problems are analyzed in relation to the Community regulations directly applicable in the Member States of the European Union, as well as to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code in this matter.
-
Este acceptabilă din punctul de vedere al cerințelor impuse de dreptul la un proces echitabil motivarea hotărârii judecătorești realizată prin preluarea în considerente a unei părți din argumentele invocate, în cadrul dezbaterilor, de către una dintre părți. Câtă vreme această preluare nu s-a realizat automat, ci este rodul propriului demers al judecătorului de interpretare și aplicare a legii la situația de fapt prin prisma susținerilor părților, nu există suport pentru a se aprecia că argumentele celeilalte părți ar fi fost ignorate. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția de contencios administrativ și fiscal, Decizia nr. 1312 din 13 martie 2014) -
Conform art. 207 alin. (1) C.pr.pen., atunci când procurorul dispune trimiterea în judecată a inculpatului față de care s-a luat o măsură preventivă, rechizitoriul, împreună cu dosarul cauzei, se înaintează judecătorului de cameră preliminară de la instanța competentă, cu cel puțin 5 zile înainte de expirarea duratei acestei măsuri. Apreciem că acest termen trebuie a fi considerat un termen de decădere, pentru a fi în concordanță cu prevederile Constituției României, republicată, iar nerespectarea lui atrage decăderea procurorului din dreptul de a solicita menținerea măsurii preventive (cu notă aprobativă).
-
In order to achieve the objective of free circulation of civil and commercial judgments, as part of the process of judicial cooperation in civil matters, it was adopted the Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters which shall apply only to actions brought, to authentic instruments formally drawn up or registered and to court settlements approved or concluded on or after 10 January 2015. In spite of the fact that the Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 which regulated the same matters, has significantly contributed to the development of an area of the free circulation of judgments, certain differences between national rules governing jurisdiction and recognition of judgments have been constantly hindering the effectiveness of the access to justice of the Union’s members. In regard to such difficulties, the Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 shall be superseded by Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 whose provisions are aimed at unifying the rules of conflicts of jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters and at ensuring rapid and simple recognition and enforcement of judgments given in a Member State. For that purpose, the new Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 has brought, in the matters of recognition and enforcement, not only necessary clarifications but also substantial changes, such as the exclusion of the requirement of a declaration of enforceability. Moreover, a short analysis of its provisions is required regarding several aspects, such as the refusal of recognition and enforcement, the applicable procedure, the transitional provisions and the circumstances in which Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 shall continue to apply even after 10 January 2015.
-
The entry into force of the new Criminal Code has determined, as it was natural, new approaches to doctrine and jurisprudence, and one of the perspectives of analysis is the correlation with the constitutional provisions. This study aims to establish an examination of constitutionality, as regards the offence of deceit, from the practice of the Constitutional Court on the previous Criminal Code provisions, identifying situations where the new rules can generate discussions on the compatibility with the Constitution.
-
Collective redundancy is regulated at Community level by Directive 98/59/EC, giving rise to a vast case-law, this study focusing, in this context, on a particular aspect of determining the conditions for the existence of this type of redundancy: the notion of „establishment”. The interest of such an approach is justified in the light of the recent case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which raises the question of the compatibility of the national law with Directive 98/59/EC just as regards the mentioned notion. At the same time, as regards the relation of the national law with the Community law, it appears necessary to determine the notion of employer established by the Romanian law and to correlate it with the notion of establishment, regulated by the European Directive.
-
In this study the authors present a series of considerations on the decisions of the Constitutional Court and their effects, in the light of the provisions of Article 147 of the Romanian Constitution of 1991 (revised in 2003 and then republished on 31 October 2003), of the provisions of the Law No 47/1992 on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court (republished on 3 December 2010), as well as of the relevant case-law of the Constitutional Court in the matter. In this regard, the authors examine, sometimes in a critical manner, the following problems: the acts by which the Constitutional Court exercises its powers; why the decisions of the Constitutional Court have a general binding nature; whether there is a typology of the decisions of the Constitutional Court or not; the interpretative decisions of the Constitutional Court; the relations of the Constitutional Court with other public authorities arising as a result of the decisions of the Constitutional Court; the effects of the decisions of the Constitutional Court establishing the unconstitutionality of some legal provisions of parliamentary laws, ordinances, regulations and resolutions; the effects of the decisions of the Constitutional Court establishing the unconstitutionality of some provisions included in laws, before their promulgation; the effects of the decisions of the Constitutional Court on the constitutionality/unconstitutionality of the treaties or of the international agreements; the decisions of the Constitutional Court are generally binding and are effective only for the future.
-
This paper is a critical analysis of the new regulations concerning the punishment, from the perspective of their compliance with the principle of individualization. It discusses, by turns, the issue of the significance of the principle of individualization, of the reasons that justify the existence of some general criteria of individualization and of the questionable significance of the current general criteria of individualization, included in Article 74 of the new Criminal Code.
-
In this study, the authors have examined the provisions of the Romanian Civil Code (the Law No 287/2009) concerning the maintenance obligation (Articles 513– 534). Therefore, there are analyzed: the general principles; the subjects of the maintenance obligation; the order in which maintenance is due; the conditions of the maintenance obligation; determination and performance of the maintenance obligation.
-
By means of this study, the author tends to point out that, despite the principle of „equality before the law of the children born out of wedlock to the children born in wedlock”, provided by Article 48 (3) of the Constitution and reaffirmed by Article 260 of the Romanian Civil Code, in the Romanian law, no less, there are situations of „different legal treatment” of the two categories of children. Specifically, it is raised for discussion the different legal regulation of some aspects, as in the cases relating to: „determination of the paternity”, „acquiring the name”, „confirmation of the filiation” and „prohibition of the adoption of children whose parents did not reach the age of 14”. Likewise, for the situations noted, the author substantiates de lege ferenda proposals meant to ensure respect for the principle of equality before the law of children born out of wedlock to those born in wedlock.
-
Preliminarii. Termenul de securitate are o adresabilitate variată și complexă, putând influența și afecta atât individul, cât și orice nivel de organizare socială, colectivitate, stat sau organizație internațională. În mod sintetic, noțiunea de securitate1 implică lipsa oricăror amenințări, dar și posibilitatea prezervării unui nucleu de valori și a bunăstării2. Pentru orice individ și pentru o comunitate în ansamblul său sentimentul de securitate este acut și se construiește pe trei coordonate esențiale: liniștea, ocrotirea și absența fricii. Aceste trei coordonate definesc sensul primar al noțiunii de securitate a cărei etimologie provine din latinescul securus, desemnând pe cel care nu se teme (sine cura)3.
