-
The new Criminal Code brings changes with regard to the offences against property, contained in Title II of the special part, including with regard to the incidence of reconciliation. The mixed nature of this institution of criminal material law and of criminal procedural law has generated difficulties in the judicial practice, particularly in relation to Article 159 (2) of the Criminal Code, which states that it must occur before reading the referral act and it raises for discussion a constitutionality examination in relation to the Constitutional Court case-law. -
The principle of opportunity is applied in all criminal legislations, although some leave it unmentioned and others expressly establish it. The author analyses the evolution of this principle, starting from the former criminal legislation to the criminal legislation in force, pointing out the advantages of the new regulation.
-
The safety measure of extended confiscation was introduced by the Law No 63/2012 and is a transposition into the national legislation of the provisions of Article 3 of the Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA on Confiscation of Crime-Related Proceeds, Instrumentalities and Property. The study below has as purpose to analyse the provisions of this measure, provided in Article 1121 within the general part of the Criminal Code.
-
The article examines from a theoretical point of view and from a practical perspective the rules regulating the ancillary punishment and the complementary punishments, presenting the aspects of continuity and the novelties brought by the criminal provisions in the field.
-
Following the systematic examination of some normative acts in the field of administrative law, the National Integrity Agency has expressed its opinion in the sense that the exercise of the position of secretary of the administrative-territorial units (Bucharest Municipality, county and local councils), simultaneously with the position of chairman or deputy at the electoral bureau of the polling station generates a situation of incompatibility with the provisions of the Law No 161/2003 and Law No 35/2008. The author of this study combats this opinion of the National Integrity Agency (submitted for compliance to the county and local councils by administrative means), reaching a symmetrically opposite conclusion (there is no incompatibility in the given situation).
-
The authors make an analysis of the Romanian legislation in the matter of forensic reports – and, particularly, in the field of medical malpractice – and they establish that, in these areas, there is a plurality of normative acts of different levels (laws, Government ordinances, Government decisions, orders of ministers), regulations which, quite often, are confused, contradict each other, are incomplete, sometimes they are not correlated with the rules of principle in the matter of evidence included in the current Civil Procedure Code, respectively the Criminal Procedure Code etc. At the end of the analysis, the authors propose the repeal of this entire scattered legislation and the elaboration of a single normative act on the matter (at level of law or of Government ordinance) that, having regard to the current legislative experience, would completely and unitarily bring a modern, unique and unitary regulation with regard to the forensic reports (including those concerning the medical malpractice).
-
In the ambience of the legislative framework instituted by the new Civil Procedure Code, this study intends to make an analysis of several aspects referring to the determination of the jurisdiction of law courts which settle disputes in matters of administrative disputes, regulated by the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004, in comparison with the procedural provisions instituted by the new Civil Procedure Code. In order to achieve the proposed approach, the study analyses the compatibility of the procedural rules of common law included in the new Civil Procedure Code referring to the determination of the jurisdiction of the law courts in relation to the provisions of the Law No 554/2004 regulating the jurisdiction of the law courts in matters of administrative disputes.
-
This study is dedicated to the analysis of the rules of the Civil Code established for „the presumption of the legal time of conception” and to „the presumption of paternity”, insisting mostly on the novelties brought by the current regulations and by the reactions of the specialized literature in this regard. Where appropriate, de lege ferenda proposals have been grounded in order to eliminate the reported legislative inconsistencies. Also, personal points of view have been expressed on various controversial aspects of the doctrine in relation to the interpretation of the legal rules established for these two important legal institutions.
-
Law No 85/2006 on the procedure of insolvency was initially repealed and replaced by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 91/2013 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and of insolvency, which was in force only a few days, being declared unconstitutional, in its entirety, by the Constitutional Court of Romania. For this reason, it was necessary to adopt a new law on this matter (No 85/2014) which entered into force at the end of June 2014. In this study, the authors examine more extensively the principles of the procedure of insolvency, as well as the rights and the obligations of the participants, as currently regulated by Law No 85/2014, in comparison, when appropriate, with the previous law (Law No 85/2006).
-
În cazul în care societatea a hotărât, prin hotărâre AGA, demararea acțiunii în răspundere împotriva membrilor organelor sale de conducere, fără a desemna un mandatar special împuternicit cu efectuarea demersului judiciar pentru punerea în aplicare a acestei hotărâri, nu se poate considera că mandatul general de administrator cuprinde, implicit, acest mandat. Prin urmare, acțiunea în justiție promovată de administrator în numele societății, fiind formulată de o persoană care nu prezintă mandatul special cerut de lege, nu respectă cerințele impuse prin art. 155 din Legea nr. 31/1990 cu privire la condițiile speciale ale reprezentării, devenind, astfel, deplin incidente dispozițiile de drept procesual civil referitoare la lipsa dovezii calității de reprezentant, reglementate prin art. 161 C.pr.civ., care impun, în condițiile respectării regimului procesual al excepției, anularea cererii de chemare în judecată. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția a II-a civilă, Decizia nr. 3726 din 5 noiembrie 2013) -
Aspecte introductive. Motivarea unei hotărâri judecătorești este procesul cognitiv prin care judecătorul, în raport de petitul acțiunii, argumentele părților, probatoriul administrat și dispozițiile legale, elaborează soluția. Motivarea trebuie să înglobeze toate rațiunile ce au dus la edictarea soluției1, expresie a judecății efective a cauzei. Este deci esențial ca soluția pronunțată să aibă la bază o motivare completă, denumită în doctrină ca suficientă (deci nu se urmărește o motivare totală care să răspundă fiecărei susțineri a părților, dar nu se poate accepta o motivare parțială), care să se raporteze cel puțin la fiecare categorie de argumente invocate de părți, prin arătarea rațiunii pentru care a fost reținută respectiva categorie de argumente ori înlăturată.
-
The study contains an analysis of the theoretical and practical aspects concerning the extraordinary judicial remedy of reopening criminal proceedings in case of trial in absence of the convicted person in the light of the new Criminal Procedure Code. First, the author presents the reasons for imposing the establishing of an effective remedy in the positive law through which the person on trial in absentia can obtain a retrial in his presence. Further on, after a review of the evolution of national legislation in the field of safeguards for retrial of the person on trial in contumacy, the author of the study emphasizes the meaning conferred by the Romanian legislator to the notion of „trial in absence”. Similarly, there are treated the conditions and the procedure of reopening the criminal proceedings, the particularities of retrial and, finally, the concurrence between the procedural mechanism of reopening criminal proceedings and other judicial remedies – the appeal and the contestation for annulment. Likewise, the author also makes some proposals de lege ferenda for the purpose of improving the regulation of the analyzed institution and of avoiding the appearance of some non-unitary practices during its application.
