The study devoted to the loan contract resumes in a new form, determined, indeed, by the new Civil Code as well, this type of contract with a millenary existence, which has its roots in the Roman Age. The study emphasizes the evolution in time of the loan contract, from the essentially free loan, concluded between relatives, friends, acquaintances, a contract in which the moral precepts, including those related to religious morals, were extremely obvious, to the current loan contract, with an onerous variant, a contract that, without having lost its viability, has become extremely topical, useful. The study also emphasizes the form in which the Civil Code has insisted on regulating this type of contract, under the more or less beneficial influence of the doctrine and of the case law prior to its adoption. We tried, where we found it necessary, to go beyond the traditional patterns of the contract, as it is regarded by a significant part of the doctrine, and to accredit other points of view, being fully aware of their fragility. Last but not least, we tried to adapt the theories of some pragmatic exigencies, which, ultimately, should prevail over any constructions more related to the philosophy of law, not to the changing law.

Starting from the contents of the preliminary theses which seem to announce the imminent entry into force of a new Administrative Code, this study proposes an analysis on a double level: on the one hand, by establishing some correct relations both with the future Administrative Procedure Code and with other hypothetical future codes (the Urbanism Code, the Domain Code, the Contraventional Code, etc.), the matter to be regulated by this new Code should be decided: from a minimalist vision (the central and local public administration plus, possibly, the public function and civil servant) to a maximum one (additionally, the same Code is also going to cover the matter of public services, of goods belonging to the administration, of administrative liability respectively), for reasons of pure opportuneness it is for the legislator to delimit this Code from others which he envisages in the more or less near future. On the other hand, we have approached, at the level of legal details, some problems that, de lege lata, do not have a solution at all or have a questionable solution: the matter of cessation by right of the mandates of the mayors convicted to custodial sentences with suspension of the punishment under supervision, of the mayor’s quality of the State's representative, the daring solution of repealing the provisions of the Civil Code referring to the public property and their development in the Administrative Code, establishing a clear distinction, as far as possible, between the liability (to third parties) of the administration from that of its authorized person (a public servant, as a rule), to mention only the most important ones.

Instanța de control judiciar a decis că sesizarea formulată de judecătorul delegat cu executarea, întemeiată pe dispozițiile art. 583–585 C.pr.pen., este admisibilă și, în consecință, se va proceda mai întâi la anularea suspendării sub supraveghere a executării pedepselor aplicate pentru fapte aflate în concurs și, în continuare, în mod logico-juridic, se va proceda la contopirea acestor pedepse (cu notă aprobativă).

In this article the author presents the journalistic portrait of a prominent representative of the Transylvanian intellectuals’ elite – Camil Velican, whose biography belongs to the model of Transylvanian Romanian intellectual from the turn of the 19th century to the 20th century. Following his family’s tradition, Camil Velican opted for legal studies, heading at first for the Hungarian capital, where he attended, at the Royal Hungarian University, the classes of the Faculty of Law and Political Sciences (1897–1900). The model of the best Romanian students in Budapest attracted him to the Academic Society „Petru Maior”, where the talents of the national literature were formed. He continued his studies starting from 1900 at the „Ferenc József” University in Cluj, where he obtained his Ph.D. in Law in 1902, after which he dedicated himself to the profession of lawyer. Camil Velican was acknowledged as a prominent representative of the Romanian lawyer profession, a profession he practiced at the Bar of Alba, whose member he has been since 1903. With a rich political activity, he was the first Romanian Mayor of Alba Iulia after the Union of Transylvania with Romania on 1 December 1918. He had a successful career, both in administration and in the legal field, and he contributed, through his knowledge, to the economic and cultural development of the community to which he was fully committed. It must be noted that Alba Iulia was the first city where, on 20 November 1918, it was installed a Romanian administration, in which Camil Velican served as mayor. The activity in the role of mayor was a special one and contributed to the development of the city, which had become a very important one for the whole country, given the historical event which took place here. On 12 June 1937 it was prematurely interrupted the thread of a life during which he could have continued a prodigious activity in the most diverse areas of public life: politics, administration, economy, culture. Subsequently, under the communist regime, the name and activity of Camil Velican were intentionally forgotten, as well as of other achievers of the Great Union. Moreover, his family has been subject to some political persecution, specific to those regrettable old times. Even the change of paradigm in the Romanian society after 1989 did not change the old state of facts, the memory of the one who was Camil Velican being still ignored. Moreover, the house of the Velican family, which was one of the main places established for the reception of delegates and for assembly of the Transylvanian leaders in order to organize the day of 1 December 1918, continues to be nowadays in an unjustified and unjust state of decay.

Article 913 of the Civil Procedure Code regulates two situations in which the court executor will establish the existence of an impediment to enforcement: when the minor himself categorically refuses to leave the debtor, respectively when the minor has aversion to the creditor. Faced with either of the two hypotheses, the court executor will not put pressure on the minor (he will not use force, he will not abuse him), but he will draw up an official report, which he will communicate to the parties and to the representative of the General Directorate of Social Assistance and Child Protection, which will notify the competent court (the guardianship and family court) to order a psychological counselling programme appropriate to the child’s age as a protection measure necessary to avoid the child’s subsequent refusal on enforcement. The child who has reached the age of 10 will be mandatorily heard. According to the law, the psychological counselling programme can not exceed 3 months. After an initial psychological assessment of the child, the psychologist appointed by the court will determine the duration and content of the psychological counselling programme. Upon the completion of the psychological counselling programme ordered by the guardianship court, the psychologist draws up a report which he communicates to the court, to the court executor and to the General Directorate of Social Assistance and Child Protection. Whereas the starting point for the new regulation was represented by the presumption that the minor’s going through the counselling programme will lead to the change of attitude towards the creditor of the obligation, after receiving the report drawn up by the psychologist, the court executor will resume the procedure of enforcement, under the terms of Article 911 of the Civil Procedure Code, therefore in the presence of a representative of the General Directorate of Social Assistance and Child Protection and, if the latter considers it necessary, of a psychologist, and he may benefit, when necessary, from the assistance of the public force agents.

Contractul de asistență juridică învestit cu formulă executorie, în condițiile legii, constituie titlu executoriu cu privire la restanțele din onorariu și alte cheltuieli efectuate de avocat în interesul clientului. Este nelegală executarea silită pornită pentru o sumă pe care creditoarea o apreciază ca fiind datorată cu titlu de prejudiciu pentru încălcarea obligațiilor contractuale. Creanța nu reprezintă o plată pentru o activitate profesională desfășurată de societatea de avocatură, ci o despăgubire pentru încălcarea clauzelor contractuale de către contestator, având astfel caracterul unei clauze penale. Din această perspectivă nu prezintă relevanță în ce măsură creditoarea putea desfășura activități de intermediere sportivă ori dacă putea pretinde debitorului executarea obligației garantate potrivit contractului de ipotecă mobiliară pentru o nerespectare a obligațiilor asumate în cazul unui transfer. Nu este permis ca prin convenția lor părțile să poată ca, sub denumirea de „onorariu”, să-și creeze un titlu executoriu pentru o creanță care în realitate este o despăgubire.