-
This study analyzes the new regulations of the Romanian Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009, republished on October 1, 2011) regarding compensation for harm caused to the human body. In this sense, the special rules regarding compensation for personal injury in the said Civil Code are discussed, then a definition of such injuries is proposed, the natures of the injuries in question are emphasized, and, finally, the special uses of the full compensation injury principle in the area of personal injuries are pointed out. -
In the context of the express consecration of the protection of non-patrimonial rights also for the legal persons, according to Article 257 of the Civil Code, it becomes useful to analyze the evolution of the practice in the matter of repairing the non-patrimonial damage caused to the legal persons. Also, the historical perspective of the notion of moral damages, the procedural means and the relevant jurisprudence of the ECHR allow us to place this issue today, concluding that the principles of the tort civil liability apply to each case, depending on the proven factual evidence, but also on the diversity of the legal persons, on the variety of their objectives. -
Engaging the civil tort liability has as finality the full reparation of the damage. Reparation is a legal means by which the victim may claim to be reinstated in the situation prior to the commission of the illegal act. The right to reparation depends on an objective fact, that of causing the damage. The condition of the certainty of the damage is its most important character. If the damage is not certain, it can not be ascertained whether the right to reparation arose, and if the uncertainty concerns the extent thereof, the object of the claim for damages can not be established. Sometimes, in practice, it is difficult to determine whether the damage invoked is certain or possible. In relation to this condition of certainty of the damage, the damage by loss of the opportunity to gain an advantage is one of the innovative elements of the new regulation, being outlined as a distinct category of reparable damage. -
-
“Vague” legal concepts are inevitable, these proving their usefulness not only for covering some varied and virtually unlimited legal situations, impossible to imagine by the legislator, but also for ensuring the transition from the “the written law” to the experienced law” – given the evolution of the regulatory legal system background, while stimulating the updating of the written one. Conventional rules, primary and secondary, excel through the use of such concepts, called “autonomous”, but these are not foreign to any constitutional standards either, although one could say that, by definition, these must single out by the rigor and perfect predictability. Therefore, recognizing their indispensability and usefulness, we shall bring into focus some of the peculiarities of the review in terms of the way of interpretation and implementation of such concepts. -
Principiul separației puterilor a fost „importat” din Marea Britanie, englezii fiind cei care, în secolul al XVII-lea, au început să îl aplice în încercarea de a fragmenta puterea politică ce aparținea, în mod tradițional, doar regelui. Apoi, un pas important pe acest drum anevoios a fost făcut de gânditorii politici francezi, ideea modernă a separării puterilor în stat datorându-se filosofului și gânditorului iluminist francez, baronul de Montesquieu, care a făcut distincție între trei puteri în stat: legislativă, executivă și judiciară – acesta fiind fundamentul separației puterilor regăsit (și repetat) în dreptul constituțional modern. În concepția lui Montesquieu, cele trei puteri trebuie să aparțină unor organe diferite ale statului: Libertatea nu admite unirea a două și cu atât mai mult a trei puteri în sânul uneia și aceleiași puteri a statului. Dacă puterea legislativă e unită cu cea executivă, atunci cel ce edictează legile aplicându-le nu va urma indicațiile cuprinse în ele, tolerând încălcarea lor, și în țară va domni arbitrarul. Dar arbitrarul va interveni și în cazul în care în aceleași mâini se unesc puterea judecătorească și cea executivă, judecătorul va fi asupritor, întrucât va fi în același timp și judecător, și executantul legii. De asemenea, nu pot fi unite, în același organ, puterea judecătorească și cea legiuitoare, întrucât, procedându-se astfel, judecătorul, rezolvând procesele, nu va urma strict legea, ci are posibilitatea să introducă schimbări în conținutul legii -
-
In this scientific article, the author addresses one of the problems faced by the current judicial practice in criminal matters. Specifically, it is about detecting the relationship between the offence of money laundering and the offence of concealment, starting from the theoretical approach of comparison and reaching to the exposition of some solutions from the judicial practice. The author proposes criteria on the basis of which this delimitation can be made in a clear and constant manner. -
This study aims to identify the constituent moment, a moment when the manifestation of the original constituent power intervenes. While in case of the derived constituent power formal and material limits are pre-established, and the revision of the Constitution is an activity with a consistent procedural component, in case of the original constituent power an analysis of comparative law can identify ex ante which are the main moments when we can speak about the manifestation of the constituent power. These moments are closely related to different internal and international social events which took place in the historical evolution of a state, and these can be grouped into: constituent moments mainly determined by a revolution, by the change in the political regime or by the formation of a state. Thus, the main questions to which we seek to answer are: Which is the onset signal that will lead to the beginning of the constituent procedure? Is the new Constitution legitimate? Is the new Constitution the work of an original constituent power or of a derived constituent power? -
The study tries to outline the concept of misuse of law as it is regulated in the new Romanian Civil Procedure Code, starting from the regulations of novelty introduced by the new Civil Code. Recognized in the case-law and in the doctrine as a phenomenon inherent to the exercise of the subjective rights, the misuse of law appears better outlined on procedural level, unlike the substantive law, both with regard to its constitutive elements and the conditions in which it can be found and in respect of the sanctions that may appear. Even if the regulation of the new Civil Procedure Code is wider, a series of discussions raise, further on, the issue of misuse of law in the matter of the right of action under the terms of express sanctioning for bringing, in bad faith, an application for summons or for exercising an obviously unfounded judicial remedy. -
This study presents the specific elements of the security obligation, having as benchmarks the scope, the legal nature and the fundamentals of the civil repair liability and preventive, anticipatory liability based on the precautionary principle. The stated conclusions try to define this obligation, thus providing a useful approach to the legal action of the creditor regarding the debtor’s liability for infringement of that obligation. -
In the first part of this study the authors present the advantages of parties’ representation through a lawyer, namely through a legal adviser. They’re also showing the solutions promoted in comparative law in this matter, noting that the principle of European law is that of mandatory parties’ representation by a lawyer. Authors’ approach materializes in a comprehensive analysis of the new Code of Civil Procedure provisions concerning parties’ to the appeal mandatory representation through a lawyer or legal adviser. In the authors’ opinion this requirement is aimed not only at the appellant, but also at the intimate. Individual reflections are also formulated in terms of the representation of the parties in withdrawal extraordinary remedy at law, namely the appeal for annulment and revision. The provisions of the law regarding the measures for relieving courts and preparing the implementation of Law no. 134/2010 regarding the Code of Civil Procedure are also analyzed, summarized in the final part of the study. This normative act contains a particular provision on judicial and prosecutor offices’ representation in court. The authors opinion that the procedural rule subject to the analysis takes into account the representation of courts and prosecutors offices in the event that they participate on their own behalf in the substantive law report.
