The matter of personal data was subjected to review, in order to adapt the dynamics of the new technologies to the imperatives for protecting personal life. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive (EU) 2016/680 have as their object the personal data processing operations and reflect the process of adaptation to the new national and cross-border realities, and also reflect the harmonization of the numerous proposals formulated, particularly by companies and by the representatives of the civil society. The analysis concerns the new Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and is divided as follows: the first part delineates the relevant provisions of the personal data, identifies the right to privacy and the right to the protection of personal data, as fundamental rights of individuals, outlines the scope of the Regulation, details the terminology aspects and exposes the personal data processing principles; the second part addresses the rights of the persons concerned and the obligations of professionals in handling the personal data, the international data transfer, control authorities and procedures envisaged in the interstate cooperation.

The Law No 136/1995 on insurance and reinsurance in Romania did not expressly mention that the insurer acquires a right of regress against the person responsible for causing the prejudice, but only that the former is subrogated in all rights of the insured or of the beneficiary of the insurance. The wording has generated some different interpretations in practice as regards the action of the insurer to the reparation of the prejudice, this being classified either as special action, founded on the civil tort liability, or as action of common law, based on the civil contractual liability. These interpretations have led to the express regulation of the action for regress within Article 31 (6) of the Government Emergency Ordinance No 54/2016 concerning the compulsory motor vehicle insurance for civil liability for the prejudices caused to third parties by vehicle and tram accidents, which has repealed the Law No 136/1995, but which does not have a law for adoption yet.

The study1 is structured around case law elements revealed by the European Union Court of Justice in the field of protecting the financial interests, as resulting from the Judgment in Taricco and others Case. The arguments rising from this judgment have effect in two relatively neighboured matters such as fighting European revenues fraud and fighting tax fraud. Solving the case, the Court seems to abolish the borders between the two concepts, generating a series of issues in criminal law.

In this study we intend to discuss and to find a solution for the multiple aspects specific to the removal of application of the foreign law in the national law, but also to trace the influences of the European law on the domestic law. We will analyze in detail the independence of application of the foreign law from the condition of reciprocity, invoking the foreign law before the authorities of the forum, but also aspects concerning the contractual incorporation of the foreign law. We will define the notion of application of the foreign law and, likewise, we will subject to investigation the modalities in which this application occurs. In order to elaborate this study we will consider the relevant domestic law, the provisions of the international conventions concerning the application of the foreign law, the provisions in the matter of the European law, the legislation and the case law from different States, and we will raise for discussion the decision of the Constitutional Court of Romania No 294/2016 relating to the rejection of the plea of unconstitutionality of the provisions of Article 1.096 (1) c) of the Civil Procedure Code, which gives us a practical view on the subject-matter discussed.

Present in the Romanian Criminal Code (Article 356), with ancient tradition of incrimination, the contamination of water makes the transition from the offences against public health to those concerning the environmental protection, meaning that, although being, in principle, a hazard offence, it involves an immediate result (harmful nature). This situation creates a series of difficulties in practice, including in terms of evidence, as it arises from the recent case law, a fact that requires a series of clarifications.

The meanings of the principle of proportionality are identified in the case law and in the legal doctrine during the modern and contemporary period, emphasizing the idea of continuity in understanding this principle. The main connotations of this principle, found in the doctrine, are expressed by the ideas of fairness, balance, adequate ratio, reasonableness, equity, but also in logical plan, by the dialectic reasoning of proportionality. The analysis of case law and of doctrine reveals the importance of this principle, whose purpose is to materialize the legal standard, to substantiate the concept of legitimacy in law and to serve as a key criterion that allows the demarcation between the legitimate manifestations of the state power and, on the other hand, the excess of power in the activity of the state authorities. The only regulations of the Romanian Constitution which specifically refer to the principle of proportionality are included in Article 53, with the marginal title „Restriction of the exercise of some rights and freedoms”. In this study, by using different ways of legal interpretation, we also identify other constitutional rules which involve this principle.