-
In the judicial practice, there are divergent opinions regarding the settlement of cases in which the reports drawn up by the Labor Inspection are contested, invoking the inexistence of work accidents. Some courts have considered that the litigation should be tried by the administrative sections in the courts of law, others have decided that trial courts have the competence required to solve the case in the first instance and a third opinion is that of dealing with the case separately and of solving the aspects regarding the administrative sanctions and, respectively, the nature of the accident by different courts. The author considers that the complaints against this type of reports fall under the jurisdiction of trial courts and not under the jurisdiction of administrative courts. -
In the judicial practice, there are divergent opinions regarding the settlement of cases in which the reports drawn up by the Labor Inspection are contested, invoking the inexistence of work accidents. Some courts have considered that the litigation should be tried by the administrative sections in the courts of law, others have decided that trial courts have the competence required to solve the case in the first instance and a third opinion is that of dealing with the case separately and of solving the aspects regarding the administrative sanctions and, respectively, the nature of the accident by different courts. The author considers that the complaints against this type of reports fall under the jurisdiction of trial courts and not under the jurisdiction of administrative courts. -
The present study aims to emphasize the current state of the principles of ethics in the field of artificial intelligence world-wide, respectively in the Western world (especially the European Union and the United States of America), Russia and China. The author set out to create the necessary debate framework for the importance of raising awareness of this area and of its impact on everyday life. Finally, the study also presents the author’s conclusions on what is ethically important at its intersection with the field of law. Being a new constituent element of contemporary reality, artificial intelligence can no longer be ignored. It is obvious that at present there are missing the binding regulations which give an adequate answer to the problems generated by the arising and functioning of artificial intelligence. Due to the extraordinary, unknown, even unpredictable implications, it will not be possible to create the specific legislation in such a way as to meet the expectations unless a rigorous ethical analysis is done in advance. The study identifies documents issued by state authorities and private entities in which an ethical perspective is taken in relation to the field of artificial intelligence and draws a conclusion on its importance. The author also offers his own perspective on the important ethical principles, in particular, from the perspective of the legal field. -
The current standards on the quality, the integrity and the non-disclosure of the professional secret in the interprofessional complementary activities of the Romanian judicial system represent, in the contemporary society, a concern to adjust to the permanently changing reality. The existence of some constants such as independence, competence, responsibility, but also honour, dignity and respect, in reality, receives new meanings, and their convergence is achieved only by way of a various communication. Creating some new modalities to ensure the common professional status is not an illusion, but a real need for the interprofessional dialogue to take place not only within a profession, but within more professions, for the purpose of ensuring the unity in the application of law. -
Introducere. O justiție perfectă nu poate fi concepută fără respectarea valorilor, a principiilor fundamentale, nu poate fi imaginată în afara unei societăți care mai înainte de a fi dreaptă trebuie să fie una civilizată. Societatea întemeiată pe principiile statului de drept a devenit o formulă pe care o auzim rostită pretutindeni, reluată obsesiv, ca un laitmotiv fără de care nu începe și nici nu se poate sfârși o zi. Garanția statului de drept nu poate fi întemeiată decât pe o justiție echitabilă, imparțială și eficientă -
The authors intend, in the first part of the article, to clarify, based on decisions made by the European Court of Human Rights, the meaning of “criminal charge” in relation to the provisions of art. 6 of the (European) Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, while in the second part of the article, they review the effects of the decision made in the case Anghel vs. Romania on the national legal framework and on case law. -
The principle of loyalty of evidence is a jurisprudential principle of the European Court of Human Rights. The author intended to provide an overall presentation of its evolution, both from the case law perspective and from the legislative point of view. -
The most controversial aspect in the criminal judicial practice, in the situation of invoking the plea of relative nullity of a criminal processual act, is to prove the existence of a processual injury and, related thereto, to prove the sufficient seriousness of the injury caused to the party or to the main processual subject which justifies the cancellation of the act. Most of the times, the party or the subject that invokes the nullity is put in the extremely difficult position to persuade the judicial body that processual injury is sufficiently serious to justify the drastic sanction of nullity. That is why we have considered that it is required a thorough assessment with regard to the standard of probation of injury, of proving the sufficient seriousness of the injury suffered in order to bring about the sanction of nullity. The conclusion we have reached is that the processual injury suffered is sufficient to bring about the sanction of nullity when the violation of the processual rights or guarantees of the parties or of the subjects puts them in the position to no longer be able to defend themselves with the same chance they would have defended themselves if their processual rights had not been infringed.
-
-
The purpose of this study is to present the Case Loomis v. State of Michigan, settled by the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin in the United States of America, on how the right to a fair trial may be affected assuming that the solution is pronounced by the judge, having at his disposal, among the usual elements of fact and of law in a classic trial also a report provided by an artificial intelligence system. The study contextualizes the time and the place in which the case appeared, realizing in its beginning a brief parallel between the characteristics of the American justice system and the European one in the field of fundamental rights, with a marginal incursion in the scope of the principle of proportionality. In this framework, the respective case is presented with emphasis on the arguments used by the judges of the Court, in order to reach the conclusion that the right to a fair trial is not violated insofar as the conclusions produced by the algorithm are used by observing some guiding principles, drawn on this occasion. The conclusion of the study shows that the arguments presented in the North American system can remain valid and can be transposed into the European system, when it will face such a problem. Finally, the final part is intended to be a plea for awareness of the immediate reality of artificial intelligence, which will penetrate more and more in the legal field, including in the judge’s office, as well as for a mental openness towards these new concepts.
-
In the study hereby, the author makes a comparative analysis of regulations covering negative prescription under the current Civil Code (Law No. 287/2009, republished on July 15th, 2011 and effective since October 1st, 2011) as compared to the previous legal regulations (in particular, Decree No. 167/1958 on negative prescription). At the end of this comparative analysis, the author concludes that the relevant regulation covering negative prescription is manifestly superior under the current Civil Code, as compared to Decree No. 167/1958. -
The present study analyses from the point of view of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) a topic of current interest in the Romanian law, namely the topic of the legality of evidence as a link between the rule of law and the right to a fair trial. By corroborating general principles and individual solutions emerges a differentiation mechanism used by the ECHR in order to distinguish between possible breaches of the domestic law in respect to their nature and degree. While in principle the way the law is interpreted and the breach of law allegedly committed in obtaining and presenting the evidence are by themselves irrelevant from the perspective of the fair trial, the arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable interpretation of the law, which violates the principles of the rule of law, is relevant from that perspective. A serious breach of law can mean the inadmissibility of the evidence obtained thereby. The ECHR doesn’t lay down general rules regarding the assessment of the arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable character of the interpretation of the law and, respectively, the seriousness of its breach, but from the case-law emerges a series of relevant criteria, such as the manifest error of assessment, the breach of law committed in bad faith or systematically, inevitable discovery of evidence and the purpose of law.
