-
Potrivit art. 226 alin. (5) C.pen., plasarea, fără drept, de mijloace tehnice de înregistrare audio sau video, în scopul săvârșirii faptelor prevăzute în alin. (1) și alin. (2), se pedepsește cu închisoarea de la unu la 5 ani. Conform art. 207 alin. (1) C.pen., constrângerea unei persoane să dea, să facă, să nu facă sau să sufere ceva, în scopul de a dobândi în mod injust un folos nepatrimonial, pentru sine ori pentru altul, se pedepsește cu închisoarea de la unu la 5 ani. Potrivit art. 291 alin. (1) C.pen., pretinderea, primirea ori acceptarea promisiunii de bani sau alte foloase, direct sau indirect, pentru sine sau pentru altul, săvârșită de către o persoană care are influență sau lasă să se creadă că are influență asupra unui funcționar public și care promite că îl va determina pe acesta să îndeplinească, să nu îndeplinească, să urgenteze ori să întârzie îndeplinirea unui act ce intră în îndatoririle sale de serviciu sau să îndeplinească un act contrar acestor îndatoriri, se pedepsește cu închisoarea de la 2 la 7 ani (cu notă parțial aprobativă). -
Law no. 287/2009 on the Civil Code provides the inheritance matter, in general, with an appropriate regulation which is characterized, in principle, by the solutions’ correctness and the flexibility and consistency of its rules. However, here and there, incomplete legal texts can be identified. Equally, one can notice the absence of regulation for certain issues raised abundantly over time by the literature. In this context, the authors of this paper identify the purports of the Civil Code with incidence in the matter of legal heritage which has some shortcomings and propose the legislator to reconsider them to improve thereof. Also, aspects that are not legally regulated are identified with a specific practical frequency.
-
The study analyzes how the investigation of the trial and debate of the fund has been regulated, from the publication of the new Civil Procedure Code to the adoption of the Law No 310/2018 amending and supplementing the Law No 134/2010 on the Civil Procedure Code. Initially, the investigation of the trial before the first instance was expected to be carried out as a rule, in the council chamber and, by exception, in public session. The debate of the fund could take place both in public session and in the council chamber. The entry into force of the provisions regarding the investigation of the trial and the debate of the fund in the council chamber has been postponed several times, never entering into force, so that by the Law No 310/2018 these provisions be abandoned. In this way, the intermediate situation by which the investigation of the trial and the debate of the fund were held in public session became permanent. In our opinion, it is criticizable to abandon the holding of the civil trial in the council chamber, given the predominantly private character of the rights and interests of the parties involved and the guarantee of the right to privacy.
-
The statistics at national level of the disputes of administrative contentious indicate a substantial share thereof in relation to the other matters handled by the courts and reveals an increasingly „blunt” relationship of the Romanian State with its citizen. The alternative means of solving the disputes generated by the activity of the public administration, present in the Romanian legislation, prove to be insufficient to reach the purpose for which they were instituted, and the recent changes brought to the material competence of the administrative contentious courts have generated to a small extent the results pursued by the legislator. The global phenomenon that marks the public law, of progressive replacement of the unilateral character of the public action with models based on dialogue and consensus, more suitable to strengthen the democratic legitimacy and the efficiency of the relations between the administration and the citizens, requires the connection of policies in the field of judicial organization, in this case of the specialized component of administrative contentious and the doctrine of administrative law, to the global approach regarding the resolution of conflicts between the administration and the citizens, including by applying the solutions validated by the experience of other national systems.
-
Faptul că procurorul nu și-a manifestat opțiunea de a menține dispoziția de trimitere în judecată sau de a solicita restituirea cauzei într-un termen de 5 zile, în condițiile art. 345 alin. (3) C.pr.pen., nu îl decade din dreptul de a formula contestație în condițiile art. 347 alin. (1) C.pr.pen., în lipsa unor dispoziții legale exprese, și solicita începerea judecății în contextul constatării legalității sesizării instanței, a administrării probelor și a efectuării actelor de urmărire penală (cu notă aprobativă).
-
Formalism is often a topic of discussion approached by reference to the form of the juridical act, more precisely to the consent externalized and recorded in a solemn act. This act is frequently outlined in the form of a notarial act, composed of two parts: the externalization of the manifestation of will of the parties and the findings of the notary public (recorded in the conclusion of authentication). The formalities presuppose any legal procedure which gives rise to a certain form and that adds safety, effectiveness and opposability to the manifestation of will. The notarial succession procedure is characterized by three procedural stages and ends with a conclusion of the notary public: the first part of this decision records the persons participating in the succession debate and the statements of those present, and the second part contains the findings of the notary public with regard to the statements of heirs in the first part of the conclusion. This conclusion issued within the succession procedure has the probative force of an authentic document, on the basis of which the certificate of heir is issued. In this study we intend to make a brief presentation of the procedural formalism, of the formalities prior to and subsequent to the conclusion of the civil juridical act. The notarial deed is the result of a concurrence between the manifestation of will of the party (or parties) and the obligations of the notary public which have a single result: the elaboration of a juridical act in accordance with the legal norms and good morals. The analysis is relevant to allow a comparative look between the formalities necessary for the elaboration of a notarial act and the formalities of the notarial succession procedure, which is completed by the certificate of heir, an act of a special legal nature.
-
The very short term usucapion can be considered a specific simplified usucapion, regulated by the provisions of the Law No 7/1996, as amended and supplemented, which represents a special way of acquiring the property right with regard to the real estates, in principle, not registered in the land book and for which there are no property deeds, through the possession noted in the land book uninterrupted for a period of 3 years. The specific usucapion analyzed applies only for the acquisition of the property right, in case of sporadic registration operation, regarding real estate lands, with or without constructions, which may form the object of private property, not registered in the land book or registered in the land book opened under the Decree-law No 115/1938, in accordance with the law.
-
Potrivit art. 457 alin. (1) C.pr.civ., hotărârea judecătorească este supusă numai căilor de atac prevăzute de lege, în condițiile și termenele stabilite de aceasta, indiferent de mențiunile din dispozitivul ei. De asemenea, conform prevederilor art. 460 alin. (3) C.pr.civ., în cazul în care prin aceeași hotărâre au fost soluționate mai multe cereri principale sau incidentale, dintre care unele sunt supuse apelului, iar altele recursului, hotărârea în întregul ei este supusă apelului.
-
The national system of public administration is subject to the impact of the medical-sanitary crisis in various forms, on all levels of organization, being additionally responsible and obliged to identify solutions of a normative and administrative nature. One of the important negative effects generated by the current medical-sanitary crisis is the impossibility of the administration to ensure the continuity of activities whose realization is conditioned by administrative authorization, by extension/renewal of authorizations, approvals, agreements, etc., making use of some acts during the validity period, in the sense of giving them the effects provided by law, or the exercise of some personal rights, on the basis of some documents (such as identity documents) when they are in the period of validity. The lack of an infralegal normative framework, of secondary regulation, establishing the scope of the documents the validity of which is extended during and beyond the cessation of special states of emergency and of alert and the conditions in which the prorogation of validity operates, leads to a non-unitary application of the normative act of primary regulation, which includes a general formulation, and inevitably at an additional pressure on the specialized administrative contentious courts, which will be notified either by their holders/beneficiaries, or by third parties whose rights and legitimate interests are harmed.
-
European democratic societies have shown, in recent years, an increased interest in reforming justice, the aim being to make more efficient the process of administration thereof. Likewise the efficiency of justice is a complex and continuous process which involves, among other things, guaranteeing the quality of the judicial decision and resolving the cases within a reasonable time. Within the present approach the author made a radiography of the most important reforms initiated and partially carried out in France, Italy and Spain. The investigation carried out has led to the conclusion of the existence of some common regulatory trends, but also to the existence of some different solutions. Common trends have been identified in terms of judicial organization, distinguishing itself a process of concentration of jurisdictions and of specialization thereof. The most significant example from this point of view is that of France, a country where a recent reform has led to the merger of the courts with the high courts. The courts resulting from this concentration are called judicial courts. In Spain, the justice reforms were initiated in 2001 following the conclusion of a „State Agreement” between the Government, the People’s Party and the Socialist Party. In Italy in recent years it was undertaken a reform which led to the increase in the competence of justices of the peace. In all the mentioned states there was also a marked tendency towards making more efficient the alternative ways of resolving the conflicts. Different procedural and judicial options were found regarding the composition of the superior councils of the magistracy, the organization of judicial inspections and the organization of the Public Ministry. Such options take into account the particularities of each judicial system, which excludes a total uniformity and are part of the democratic processes aimed at consolidating the state of law.
-
Modern society is based on the predominance of organic solidarity over mechanical solidarity and, consequently, on the predominance of the law which ensures cooperation between autonomous subjects from repressive law, which sanctions, through penalty, any deviation from the standards of the common conscience. Modern society is „civilized”, i.e. it is firstly and foremost based on „civil” law, the repressive law only being exceptional, which translates into three principles: that of the subsidiarity of criminal law, that of the necessity and legality of offences and penalties, and that of the additional protection of individual freedom when the subject is criminally charged. The consequence thereof is that, in modern liberal democracies, all repressive law is criminal, that any charge which may lead to the application of a repressive sanction is a criminal charge and that the law-maker cannot assign to the administration the competence regarding the application of repressive sanctions. Under these circumstances, the transformation of some repressive norms into norms of administrative law is a violation of the fundamental principles that structure the legal order of modern liberal states. Nonetheless, this type of practice is becoming more common. In order to ensure individual freedom, this tendency must be corrected. As politicians are not willing to do so, naturally this is a task for the judicial courts, that can rely for this endeavour on the European Court of Human Rights’ constructive jurisprudence.
-
Potrivit art. 273 alin. (1) C.pen., fapta martorului care, într-o cauză penală, civilă sau în orice altă procedură în care se ascultă martori, face afirmații mincinoase ori nu spune tot ce știe în legătură cu faptele sau împrejurările esențiale cu privire la care este întrebat se pedepsește cu închisoare de la 6 luni la 3 ani sau cu amendă.
