-
-
The normative act which regulates the Romanian citizenship is the Law No 21/1991, republished on 13 August 2010. Recently (on 15 September 2015), the Law on the Romanian citizenship No 21/1991, republished, has undergone important amendments and supplements brought by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 37/2015, an ordinance whose content is the subject of this study. -
The current Civil Procedure Code clarifies some doctrinal controversies and controversies of the arbitral case law and transposes on legislative level some solutions of the arbitral practice, meant to make the arbitral jurisdiction more efficient. Among these aspects of making it more efficient, the study mentions those related to the extension of the competence of arbitration and the autonomy of will of the parties in organizing and conducting the arbitral procedure, likely to increase the access to this private jurisdiction, as an alternative to the state jurisdiction. Another dimension of the current regulation is related to the ways of materializing the arbitral convention and of the presumption of arbitrariness of the disputes regarding all misunderstandings arising from the contract or from the legal relations to which the agreement refers. The current regulation is concerned with the quality of the jurisdictional act which it connects to the qualification of the members of the arbitration tribunal, to their impartiality, by extending the causes of incompatibility as compared to those of judges and by guaranteeing the right to defence, by representing or assisting the parties by a lawyer. The autonomy of will, which impregnates the arbitral procedure, is associated with the principles of the civil trial, extended by the current regulation to the arbitral procedure, in order to increase the procedural guarantees offered by this private jurisdiction. An innovative solution is related to the participation of third parties in the arbitral procedure, under the terms of maintaining the composition of the arbitral tribunal, in order to ensure the complete and global settlement of the dispute. Another novelty of the current regulation is related to the material competence of the courts of appeal in resolving the action for annulment and the solutions that can be pronounced in case of admitting the action for annulment. Last but not least, the regulation makes the distinction between the procedure of the institutionalized and ad-hoc arbitration, in the context of the autonomy of will of the parties. -
The author carries out a thorough analysis of all the regulations under art. 1381-1395 of the new Civil Code regarding the recovery of damages caused by extra-contractual causes. Thus, in the first part of the study, the author approaches joint liability, in case two or more persons are liable for one and the same damage. Also, a large part of the work deals with the principles governing the right and correlative obligation to recover the damages: the principle of full recovery and the principle of recovery in kind of the damages; both principles are explicitly provided in the texts of art. 1385 and 1386 of the new Civil Code. The central part of the work deals with a review of the recovery of damages by means of a money equivalent, referring in particular to the establishment of compensation for the full repair of personal injuries, both in their material and in their moral form; in the same context, large discussions are presented in relation to the pecuniary recovery of indirect damages. Another special place in the work is held by the presentation of the regulation regarding the correlation between the social security rights of the immediate or the indirect victim and the compensation that may be granted to such victim for recovery of the damages caused. The study ends with a review of the extinctive prescription of the right to claim and obtain in court the recovery of damages under tort liability. -
The author carries out a thorough analysis of all the regulations under art. 1381-1395 of the new Civil Code regarding the recovery of damages caused by extra-contractual causes. Thus, in the first part of the study, the author approaches joint liability, in case two or more persons are liable for one and the same damage. Also, a large part of the work deals with the principles governing the right and correlative obligation to recover the damages: the principle of full recovery and the principle of recovery in kind of the damages; both principles are explicitly provided in the texts of art. 1385 and 1386 of the new Civil Code. The central part of the work deals with a review of the recovery of damages by means of a money equivalent, referring in particular to the establishment of compensation for the full repair of personal injuries, both in their material and in their moral form; in the same context, large discussions are presented in relation to the pecuniary recovery of indirect damages. Another special place in the work is held by the presentation of the regulation regarding the correlation between the social security rights of the immediate or the indirect victim and the compensation that may be granted to such victim for recovery of the damages caused. The study ends with a review of the extinctive prescription of the right to claim and obtain in court the recovery of damages under tort liability. -
From the Decision No 42/2008 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, United Sections, it emerges the rule cancellation excludes revocation in respect of which, given the finality of decisions in the interest of law to ensure a unitary practice, it must be admitted that the applicability is wider than the hypothesis that has generated it. -
Starting with 25.05.2018 the Regulation (EU) No 679/2016, also referred to as Regulation on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data has entered into force. This regulation, although replacing the previous applicable directive in the matter, respectively Directive 95/46/EC, taking over from its functioning principles, brings significant novelties from the point of view of the general framework in the matter of protection of personal data, circumstantiating and detailing many of the mandatory rules in the matter. By proposing to create a common framework at unional level, the Regulation No 679/2016 provides the necessary clarifications on the background of the galloping technological evolution and the accelerated growth of cross-border personal data flows. To that end, the aim pursued by the mentioned Regulation is to create a coherent and sound framework in the matter of data protection in the Union, in the context of a climate of confidence which will allow digital economy to expand on the internal market. It is, thus, intended to ensure that individuals benefit by a greater control over personal data, as well as to consolidate legal and practical security for the natural persons, the economic operators and the public authorities. Likewise, the Regulation strictly stipulates the premises in which any processing of personal data may be considered as being lawful and, thus, allowed, at the same time with the circumstantiation of the conditions in which the person concerned may be considered to have given his consent to the forecast processing. Also, a central element of the new European legislative initiative is to provide the necessary measures to ensure the transparency of the processing of personal data. In this respect, there are configured the obligations devolving on the operators of such data to inform the persons whose data are processed, as well as the cases and conditions in which the natural persons are entitled to rectify, erase or restrict the use of data concerning them. -
-
The new Romanian Civil Procedure Code has the indisputable merit of rebalancing the relationship between parties and courts, as well as dynamising the settlement of civil disputes. From both these perspectives, provisions of Article 200 of the Civil Procedure Code, pertaining to the check and regularisation of application for summons, mark a specific stage of solving some of the „prior” issues. Some of these not only notable but even surprising provisions will be further discussed. -
-
-
Conflictul negativ de competență este reglementat de art. 133 pct. 2 din Codul de procedură civilă, ce stabilește că există conflict de competență când două sau mai multe instanțe și-au declinat reciproc competența de a judeca același proces sau, în cazul declinărilor succesive, dacă ultima instanță învestită își declină la rândul său competența în favoarea uneia dintre instanțele care anterior s-au declarat necompetente.
