-
The emergence of the Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of the Law No 134/2010 on the Code of Civil Procedure had great influence on the Government Emergency Ordinance No 34/2006 on the award of public procurement contracts. The latter stated that, in the matter of claims for compensation for damage caused during the public procurement procedure, the way of attack is an appeal on law submitted within 5 days of the communication. Difficulties with the publication and entry into force of the Law No 76/2012 were felt because it provided that the appeal would be the remedy in the matter, but before it came into force, the Government Emergency Ordinance No 34/2006 was amended by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 77/2012 which was approved by the Law 193/2013 and which left unchanged the way of attack. To solve the problems related to the succession in time of the laws, the High Court of Cassation and Justice by the Decision No 20/2015 of 5 October 2015 on the examination of the appeal in the interest of the law formulated by the Board of the Suceava Court of Appeal determined that the appeal on law is the only way of attack in the matter. Problems of interpretation have not stopped here because, while the High Court has made compulsory the way of attack, it did not make any mention of the term of exercise. Thus, a non-unitary practice has emerged because some courts have considered that the term of exercise is that of appeal, i.e. 5 days, while others have applied the general term. In our view, the time limit for exercising the appeal on law cannot be considered to be 5 days, because in this situation it would only mean that there was a replacement of the term „appeal” with „appeal on law”, but the general term provided by the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply. -
The study aims to present a case solved by German courts. It was raised the issue of the legal qualification of the winning under a beer cap, on terms of several people having put together the money for purchasing two boxes of beer and having bought them for that amount, including the bottle with the cap which contained the prize. In the case briefly presented it was necessary to determine whether the winning belongs only to the person who discovered the prize under the cap or to all the persons who have contributed with money to purchase the bottle containing the winning cap.
-
Over time, the claim for awarding legal costs in the civil trial has not been paid due attention. Starting with 1959, following a decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Tribunal, in the practice of the courts, as well as in the specialized works has been taken over automatically, until it has been imprinted in the collective mind, the idea that the court costs can be claimed at any time until the debates are closed on the merits, and the court may even draw attention to this issue, or they may be claimed separately, even if they were initially requested within the dispute. The present study aims to analyze the legal status of awarding the claim for costs, while giving at the same time the correct legal classification of this claim by reference to the texts of the Civil Procedure Code. Thus, we will show that this claim brought to the justice can not be subject to the discretionary will of the parties, but must be circumscribed by the procedural rigors with regard to filing a claim before the court. In the first instance, the party must accordingly request court costs, respectively by way of introductory application, an objection, an intervention, etc. If it did not do it, as a rule, it will not be able to claim them within that litigation. If it did it, but then waives their request in the initial litigation, wishing to claim them separately, it will be subject to the consent of the opponent. In the redress or withdrawal means of appeal, claiming the court costs is conditionned twice, both in the compliance claim before the court of first instance and in the compliance claim before each court that has examined the case (by way of appeal, objection, etc.). The practical implications of the study are some of the most spectacular, since the party that does not comply with the procedural rigors of the claim for court costs will either be in a position to promote separate action for their recovery or in the event of a final impossibility to recover, in whole or in part, the advanced court costs. -
The article analyzes the qualification of the appeal on law in civil disputes where the judicial remedy of appeal ex novo is not opened, such as the waiver of judgment and the waiver of the claimed right, where the judgment is only subject to the appeal on law. The appeal on law promoted in administrative disputes is also analyzed. The author comes to the conclusion that, even when the judicial remedy of appeal ex novo is suppressed, the appeal on law preserves its nature of extraordinary remedy. -
In this article the author analyses who can have active and passive quality in administrative contentious disputes according to the provisions of Law No 554/2004 of administrative contentious, as amended by Law No 212/2018 for amending and completing the Law on administrative contentious No 554/2004 and other normative acts. The article highlights the correlations existing between the Law of administrative contentious, the Civil Code and the Civil Procedure Code in the subject matter. The article provides solutions to many practical problems.
-
The active procedural quality in the direct guarantee action is one of the basic elements of the legal mechanism, regardless of whether we are talking about the active or the passive one. At first glance, we would say that the mechanism of direct action in general should not create too much discussion about its protagonists. However, in legal practice there has been a confusion about the subjects of the direct action, which has led to the questioning of the creditor’s active procedural capacity within the legal mechanism. Through this study, we are trying to shed some light on the practical application of direct collateral action, but also on the interest and procedural quality of the creditor and the debtor within the legal mechanism. Also, since the direct action in classic guarantee does not have a legal basis, unlike the direct action in payment, being derived from the notion of group of contracts, we will show why, in order to avoid contesting the procedural quality of the creditor within the legal mechanism of the direct action under warranty, the contracting parties must expressly insert a clause in the contract giving their consent to the transfer of the right of action to the sub-acquirer, in order to strengthen the transfer of the right of action under the guarantee for hidden defects. At the same time, as the direct action is an exception to the principle of relativity of the effects of the contract, the legislator is obliged to intervene, by introducing expressly some texts in the Civil Code, both in terms of the guarantee for eviction and in terms of the guarantee for hidden defects, so that the direct action in the guarantee finds its practical application. Only in this way will creditors be able to be protected from the effects of the exception of the lack of active procedural capacity, in terms of both guarantees provided by law (hidden defects and eviction). -
The Decision No 641/2014 of the Constitutional Court has radically changed the preliminary chamber procedure, transforming it into a procedure much closer to which it must be, in the opinion of the European Court of Human Rights, a criminal procedure conducted before a judge, even if it does not end in the ruling on the merits of the criminal charge, but it solves aspects of a particular importance on the merits concerned. The change has consisted in the overturning of the characters initially imagined by the legislator, overturning that has transformed the preliminary chamber procedure from a procedure conducted without the participation of the prosecutor, of the parties and of the injured party, with a limited contradictoriality between the prosecutor and the defendant and predominantly written, into a procedure involving the participation of the processual actors, completely contradictory and oral, in which it becomes possible to provide evidence on the main object of this processual phase (the legality of the evidence provided in the criminal prosecution phase and the legality of carrying out the acts by the criminal prosecution bodies). Unfortunately, the latest changes brought to the preliminary chamber by the adoption of the Law No 75/2016, although they represent a step forward in the attempt to make this criminal processual phase to comply with the elements of a fair procedure, do not follow precisely the spirit of the decision of unconstitutionality, as the legislator has still left question marks about the fairness of the procedure as regards the hypothesis that there have not been filed applications and/or pleas and as regards the limitation of the means of evidence. -
The radical reformation of the criminal proceedings meant also the establishment of new legal institutions. One of them is the preliminary chamber, inspired by the Anglo-Saxon law systems, and by the continental law system. Conceived as a distinct phase of criminal proceedings, the preliminary verification raises real problems of constitutionality, being unable to fit into the mechanism of the judicial bodies stated in the Fundamental Law. In so far as it takes over functions of the judges and it excludes from debates the main subjects of criminal proceedings, it is also contrary to the requirements of the ECHR on the principles of equality of arms and equity. -
The idea of a neutral power from those derived from the separation of powers was preceded in the modern epoch by the placing of one of the Chambers of the Parliament in the role of balancing and preserving power. This second Chamber had to be different from the first one, in order for it to be superior. The manner of conceiving this superiority and the balancing and conservative role of this Chamber have been different from one epoch to another and from one system to another. In the following article, subsequent to a brief analysis of the concepts of neutral power and balancing power, I shall investigate the role played by the superior Chamber of Parliament in the constitutional history of Romania.
-
The consent of the patient is a legal consent and therefore it has to comply with all the validity conditions thereof. Among these, the condition of the capacity of exercise of the minor patient benefits from a special regulation by Article 661, the 2nd sentence of the Law No 95/2006. The present study intends to analyze these special provisions, by corroborating them with the regulations applicable to the legal representatives of the minor and by reference to the common law in the matter of capacity of exercise, for the purpose of accomplishing the finality of the legal provisions (protected access to the medical service) and of avoiding some blockage situations, generated by a bureaucratic interpretation. -
The problem of the capacity of exercise of the minor patient, deprived of liberty, has relevance for all types of penitentiary police units, which can keep minors in their custody, but also for the public health network, because all these institutions can face the problem of obtaining the consent for the execution of a medical intervention on the minor deprived of liberty. The minor patient in the custody of the penitentiary police enjoys the same autonomy, in relation to the expression of informed consent, as the free minor patient, according to the principle of equivalence, his right to health care being guaranteed, without any discrimination in relation to his legal situation. In reference to the problems regarding the capacity of exercise of the minor deprived of liberty, required for the consent to the medical act, there are applicable both legal norms of civil law, as well as norms of medical law and criminal executional law.
-
The anticipated legal capacity of the minor represents, together with the situation of the married minor, one of the exceptions of acquiring full legal capacity at the age of 18, expressly provided in Article 40 of the new Civil Code. Thus, for acquiring the „emancipation”, the minor can address the law court himself, by way of the non-contentious procedure, and with regard to the „reasonable grounds”, the legislator has not made an enumeration or an exemplification thereof, these remaining at the discretion of the guardianship courts. Given the implications which the measure of emancipation of the minor could have on himself and on others, this must be seen as an exceptional one, and although there is still no case law on the application of Article 40 of the Civil Code, de lege ferenda, the possibility to revert to the recognition of the anticipated legal capacity by the guardianship court would be, to the same extent, an appropriate measure of the higher interest of the minor.
