-
The phrase actio libera in causa designates that situation in which the perpetrator, at the time of committing a deed stipulated by the criminal law, was in a situation that excludes the imputable character of the deed. However, it must be emphasized that, at a previous moment, when the perpetrator was not under the incidence of such causes, he triggered or allowed the emergence of some states of fact that would eliminate the imputable character of the deed. In such a hypothesis, the criminal doctrine from Romania is unanimous in accepting that the person who causes his own state of incapacity will be liable under the criminal law. In order to argue the possibility that a person, at the time of committing a typical action or inaction, be liable under the criminal law, the authors of criminal law in our country have adopted the model of exception or extraordinary imputation. According to this system, the perpetrator will be liable under the criminal law for causing his own state of incapacity. Thus, the imputability, in the case of the construction of actio libera in causa, will not be analyzed at the time of committing the criminal deed, but in relation to the moment when the perpetrator caused his state of incapacity. The construction actio libera in causa, from our point of view, covers only certain hypotheses in which the perpetrator creates the appearance of existence of a cause of imputability (intoxication, irresponsibility, physical or moral constraint), and not those hypotheses, in which the perpetrator provokes the existence of a justifying cause. -
In consequence of Romania’s accession to the European Union, in recent years there have been adopted a series of laws (the Law No 315/2005 and the Law No 17/2014 and others) which establish a series of new legal provisions with reference to the acquisition, in Romania, of the right to private property and its subdivisions over land by the foreign citizens and by the stateless persons. In this study, the author makes an interesting analysis of these new Romanian legal establishments, to which it is also added the Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (entered into force on 17 August 2015) on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of successions and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession. -
The authors plead for the distinct regulation of the manifestly illegal acts and measures showing that their legal treatment requires operative sanctions and their removal in due time having regard to their implications for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Taking into account the implications increased by the latest changes of the institution of the initiation and continuation of the criminal prosecution there are pointed out some inconsistencies of the criminal processual legislation with the provisions of the Constitution and of the European Convention of Human Rights, expressing some criticism of unconstitutionality. Thus they criticize the obligativity to initiate criminal prosecution „in rem” even when the authors are indicated or known, and make some „de lege ferenda” proposals, for the concordance of Article 304 (2), Article 305 (1), (2) and (3) and Article 339 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Code with the provisions of the Constitution. -
Fapta asiguratului de a nu renunța la calitatea de parte civilă, deși a primit plata despăgubirilor de la asigurător, nu are semnificația unui act prin care se împiedică realizarea dreptului de regres al asigurătorului, astfel că nu se pune problema angajării răspunderii în condițiile art. 2210 alin. (2) C.civ.
-
This study deals with a new institution in the Romanian criminal legislation, namely the plea agreement, which is a deal of the prosecutor with the major defendant concerning the offence, the evidence, the form of guilt and the punishment imposed, all taking the form of a simplified procedure. By combining the theoretical and the practical aspects, the article is of great interest to those who apply the criminal law. Being written in a way which transcends the already known generalities regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code, the study specifically concerns the particularities and the difficulties which accompany the application of this new legal mechanism. -
Concluded on 12 December 2015, and entering into force on 4 November 2016, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change establishes the new international legal regime of the global response to threat of climate change. Contributing to the application of the Framework Convention of 1992, the Agreement adds the objective of adaptation and breaks the tradition of the Kyoto Protocol (1997), by imposing a new approach in this field, having in its center the limitation to 2°C and, whenever possible, 1,5°C of the growth of global average temperature, in relation to preindustrial levels, determined national contributions, and a transparency mechanism in ensuring the compliance of the self-assumed commitments. Accepting climate change as a „common concern of mankind” with scientific legitimacy of the conventional process and a specific legal value, being neither a „convention” nor a „protocol”, the Agreement has a universal nature, and it completes and transforms the international legal regime of the global climate action. Innovating principles are consecrated: intergenerational equity, climate justice or progression principle, new market mechanisms, with limited action, the facilitating mechanism, periodical evaluation, et al. An important role in imposing the new strategy and the new mechanism of action in climatic matters is held by the negotiations related to the post-2015 Conferences of Parties, designed to establish the „roadmap” and the proceedings for the preparation and enforcement, after 2020, of the Paris Agreement. Part of the new international conventional context regarding the new global challenges, the Agreement completes and updates the climate regime, as part of the international environmental law, bearing important specificities.
-
In the context of the requirement to guarantee a higher level of protection of the health and safety of workers, imposed in the field even at European level 1 , the offences against labour protection are one of the ways that give expression internally to the highest legal protection in the field, satisfying both the special prevention in the field by preventing the occurrence of such events, sometimes having the most serious consequences and the need to punish more severely such deeds, when special social danger thereof requires so. The complexity of offences against labour protection lies in the often omissive and culpable conduct of the perpetrator, sometimes related to a particular specificity of the causality link between this and the state of concrete danger thus created, with special implications on the imputability of the deed, in the context of the difficult interpretation of the vast special legislation, which must, therefore, be known and correctly applied. The relevant doctrine was initiated, starting precisely with the comment on the first incrimination of this sort in the Criminal Code of Carol II of 1936, and relevant case law was found, including from the constitutional contentious court, with regard to the compliance with the principle of legality of the incrimination in terms of predictability of the rule of incrimination, short references being formulated to the European law in the matter of safety and health at work and of comparative law. Our analysis will cover the entire content of the specific offences, with reference to both the objective and the subjective typicalness of the offences against labour protection, including their pre-existing conditions, with the declared aim of supporting the practitioners in the field. -
Against the background of the interpenetration of the forms of legal liability for the same illicit deed, whether it is criminal, administrative, contraventional or disciplinary liability, in conjunction with the case law of the European courts attributing criminal character to some accusations beyond the legal qualification of the deed in the domestic law, a double criminal liability may be reached, thus posing the problem of the cumulation of these liabilities in terms of respecting the right not to be punished twice (ne bis in idem). Although no matter can be an exception, the issue arises mainly in areas where there are various forms of liability in the domestic law and different authorities with supervisory and sanctioning powers, such as tax evasion, public order, forestry or environmental offences or, finally, labour protection, which is of interest here. Thus, in the field of safety and health at work, the employer’s liability in the event of accidents at work may be exemplary for such situations, given that he is liable for both a criminal liability incurred by the judicial bodies and a contraventional liability established by the special bodies of the labour inspection, following that our approach will address this issue in the context of the current case law of the European courts of law (such as Case A and B v. Norway, Grand Chamber of the E.C.H.R., or the C.J.E.U. cases, Luca Menci, Garlsson Real Estate SA and Enzo Di Puma, Consob). -
In this article, the author examines the provisions of the new Criminal Code relating to the definition of railway accident, achieving a comparative examination of the current provisions. This paper is a continuation of other research in this area conducted by the author, activities which have resulted in the publication of a monograph and several articles in professional journals. Research results consist of a comparative examination of current and new provisions within the above-mentioned scope, and critical remarks. Research may be useful to theorists and practitioners in the field, especially the legislator, where the latter considers necessary to amend and supplement the definition of railway accidents. The major contribution of the article lies in author’s critical remarks, the de lege ferenda proposals concerning the definition of railway accidents, and in the need to provide another aggravated variant of offenses against railway traffic safety. -
-
This study deals with the delicate problems of infringement of the provisions of the Constitution of Romania by the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code governing the legal regime of the action in cassation, an extraordinary means of appeal. The author of the study notes that the analyzed norms are not in agreement with the principles written in the Basic Law, invoking in support thereof, for identity of reason, the grounds of the Decision No 485 of 23 June 2015 of the constitutional contentious court. -
The absolutisation of the effects of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union or of the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in areas not falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the European Union (EU or the Union) or in areas of shared jurisdiction where EU no longer wishes to legislate on the basis of the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality can lead to mistakes in the application of the national law by the law courts of the Member States of EU. In this article the author identifies such a case in the field of access to the data stored by the suppliers of public electronic communications networks and by the suppliers of publicly available electronic communication services and brings arguments to remedy this situation.
