The paper analyzes the institution of suspension of the enforcement of administrative acts pursuant to Article 14 of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004, as amended and supplemented, from the perspective of the solutions delivered in the recent years by courts of different ranks of jurisdiction, taking into account that the serious doubt on the legality of the administrative act must be distinguished easily after a brief investigation of the appearance of the right, because, within the procedure for suspending the enforcement, by which there can only be ordered provisional measures, the prejudgment of the merits of the case is not allowed.

The suspension of the administrative contract is an institution rather newly-introduced in the Romanian law, at the same time with the entry into force of the Law No 101/2016. However, this normative act exclusively regulates the judicial suspension of the administrative contract, which makes room for the following question: Can an administrative contract be suspended only by court decision and only under the conditions established limitatively by the Law No 101/2016 or in other circumstances as well, namely following a procedure other than that established by the aforementioned normative act? We believe that the suspension of an administrative contract may also be reached under conditions other than those established by the provisions of Article 53 (2) of the Law No 101/2016, either by administrative means, by a decision of measures taken by the competent bodies of the Court of Accounts, or as a result of the raising by one of the parties to such a contract, in relation to the other, of an exception for non-performance of the contract, or, finally, as consequence of the suspension of the unilateral administrative act on the basis of which such a contract was concluded, using the rule according to which the legal fate of the original act determines the legal status of the subsequent act. The subject seems to be new in our legal literature and engages extraordinary implications of substantive and procedural law. It is sufficient to mention here that the judicial suspension of the administrative contract enjoys, at the level of the Law No 101/2016, by a superficial regulation, requiring the supplementation by several provisions of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004, but also with those pertaining to the current Civil Procedure Code. It is this supplementation that makes it possible to clarify the institution of the judicial suspension of the administrative contract, but in a direction that raises problems which the practitioner not accustomed with the analytical doctrinal discourse could hardly envisage, of a higher depth than that encountered in the marginal comments of the legal provisions incidental in this matter. In other line of ideas, in the context of analyzing the set of prerogatives attributed by the law to the Court of Accounts, it can easily be concluded that an administrative suspension of the administrative contract is perfectly possible, ordered by a unilateral administrative act of an individual nature. Likewise, the administrative contract may end up in the situation to be suspended, as consequence of the legal suspension of the unilateral administrative act, on the basis of which the contract was concluded, an act challenged by the prefect in the exercise of the prerogatives of administrative trusteeship with which he was empowered by law. Both scenarios are binding on the use of the terminological luggage of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004. Lastly, the suspension of the administrative contract may be engaged also by the possible raising by any of the parties to an administrative contract, in relation to the other, of an exception of non-performance, which sends the assumed analysis to the ideological set of the civil law.

This article analyzes the particularities of the suspension by judgment of the enforcement of administrative acts. The legal institution of suspension of the enforcement of administrative acts is a legal instrument made available to the persons claiming to be injured and constitutes a guarantee against the producing of some irreparable damage. The author investigates the conditions and legal effects of the suspension of the enforcement of the administrative act after formulating the prior complaint and the suspension requested in the main proceedings, including also some proposals de lege ferenda. The research is carried out taking into account the latest amendments to the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004 by the Law No 212/2018 amending and supplementing the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004 and other normative acts. Also, within this research, the author refers to the decisions of the Constitutional Court on the pleas of unconstitutionality raised in this matter.

In this study has been underlined the most important trends and options regarding the role of state sovereignty in the contemporary world. Has been analyzed the place of the sovereignty in the process of integration and globalization. The conclusion is that even in this process, sovereignty of state continues to be an important component in the relations of states, based on cooperation and non-subordination.

The law provides that all declared claims will be subject to the verification procedure, with the exception of claims established by enforceable court judgments and enforceable arbitral awards, as well as budgetary claims resulting from an uncontested enforcement title within the time limits provided by special laws. In case the court judgments or arbitral awards are annulled, quashed or modified in the means of appeal, the judicial administrator/judicial liquidator will restore the table of claims accordingly. In case the court, by annulling or quashing the judgment, does not settle also the merits of the case, the judicial administrator or the judicial liquidator will proceed to the verification of that claim, by notifying the creditors in the event of total or partial non-inclusion of the claim, the creditors having, against the measure of the practitioner, in the Bulletin of Insolvency Procedures the extract of the report of the judicial administrator or of the judicial liquidator in which that measure is described. The judicial administrator will proceed immediately to the verification of each application and of accompanying documents and will conduct a thorough investigation to determine the legitimacy, the exact value and priority of each claim. For this purpose, the insolvent practitioner has the right to request explanations from the debtor, will be able to discuss with each debtor, requesting additional information and documents, if he considers it necessary. The regulation included in paragraph (2) of Article 106 of the Insolvency Code has an absolute novelty character, because until the appearance of the Law No 85/2014 the judicial administrator/judicial liquidator did not have the right to establish that the extinctive prescription of the claim has arisen. This is provided that, in the conception of the new Civil Code, the prescription can only be invoked by the one in whose favour it runs. Therefore, if the insolvent practitioner will appreciate that for the amount of money declared by a creditor within the procedure the extinctive prescription has arisen, he will notify the creditor in that regard, without further checks on the pretended claim, the legislator considering that in this case it acts, although it is a body applying the procedure, as a representative of the insolvent debtor, obviously with the possibility of the creditor interested in challenging the measure to the syndic-judge. As a result of the verifications made, the judicial administrator/liquidator will draw up and register with the court a preliminary table containing all claims against the debtor’s estate, overdue or not, under condition or under dispute, arisen before the date of the opening procedure. In the table there will be mentioned both the amount requested by the creditor and the amount accepted and the priority rank, and in the case of the creditor undergoing the insolvency procedure the appointed judicial administrator/judicial liquidator will also be indicated. In the case of the simplified procedure, in this table the claims arisen after the opening of the procedure and until the moment of going into bankruptcy will be recorded. In the case of claims which benefit from a preference cause, there will be presented the title from which the right of preference arises, its rank and, if applicable, the reasons for which the claims have been partially recorded in the table or have been removed. The claims that are benefiting from a preference case shall be entered in the preliminary table with the full value, indicating at the same time the title from which the preference right arises, their rank and, if applicable, the reasons for which the claims were only partially recorded in the table or have been removed, and in the final table, up to the market value of the guarantee determined by assessment, ordered by the judicial administrator or by the judicial liquidator, by an authorized assessor. However, Article 122 (1) of the Framework-Law makes the drawing up of the final table of claims conditional upon the handover by the assessor of the guarantee assessment report. In case the capitalization of the assets over which the preferential cause takes effect will be made at a price higher than the amount entered in the final consolidated table, the positive difference will be assigned to the guaranteed creditor, even if a part of his claim had been recorded as a secured debt, until covering the main claim and the accessories that will be calculated according to the documents from which the claim arises, until the date of the capitalization of assets. This provision will also be applied in case of failure of the reorganization plan and the sale of the asset in the insolvency procedure.

This paper summarises particularly complex issues raised by the offence of concealment. It begins with an analysis of the rational value of amendments brought to the offence of concealment (Article 270 of the new Criminal Code) and continues with the analysis of other problems raised by this offence, which either have not yet found a satisfactory solution or have solutions, but they are not known, understood and unanimously adopted in the criminal law practice.