The principle of legal contractual certainty, as regards its component the „sustainability and efficiency of the contract”, is a fundamental principle of the contract law, which emphasizes the need to maintain the contract in the cases of partial nullity and which is dealt with under a double dimension: a quantitative one and a qualitative one. The quantitative dimension concerns the „continuity of the convention” in time and is manifested by a soft and extended duration. The qualitative dimension concerns also the context, i.e. the capacity of the contract to overcome the obstacles which the economic and social events can raise, arisen during performance of the contract. The study is focused on the applicability of the principle of contractual legal certainty both in terms of interpretation, as well as of validity and performance of the contract, with references also to the provisions from the draft European contract law, an action initiated by the European Commission.

This study analyzes the scope of application of the indirect action and of the Paulian (revocatory) action both under the influence of the Civil Code of 1864, as well as under the influence of the current civil legislation (the Civil Code of 2009). The study follows the practical application, specifically, of these actions to a variety of rights which might be exercised or revoked through them, also making reference to the specialised French doctrine. There are analyzed the specialised doctrine of our country, both current and older, as well as some judgments delivered in this matter by the law courts. There have been distinguished the novelties brought by the Civil Code of 2009, in the end making a comparative enumeration of the changes brought to these institutions by the new civil legislation.

Given the importance that cybercrime is acquiring, the author has appreciated as being necessary to make an analysis on the applicability of self-defence and state of necessity in the context of cybercrime. Having as premise the necessity of justifying the retaliation in the virtual environment, the author has attempted to identify arguments in order to support the thesis according to which the self-defence and the state of necessity may find their applicability including in this area. Beyond analyzing the problematic issues related to this topic, we have tried, therefore, to emphasize the hypothetical situations in which a cyber (digital) attack is likely to give an outline to the state of self-defence or to the state of necessity.

This article presents the new criminal provisions relating to the cancellation and revocation in the cases of waiver of application of punishment, postponement of application of punishment and the suspension of the execution of the punishment under supervision. The author also proposes a new mechanism for the application of punishment if there is a concurrence between a cause of cancellation and one of revocation of the postponement of the application of punishment or of the suspension of execution of punishment under supervision.

Modalitatea de dobândire a dreptului de proprietate asupra rețelei de distribuție a energiei electrice, prin edificare sau construire, pe un teren despre care reclamantul nu susține și nu dovedește că ar fi proprietatea sa, pentru a se putea prevala de accesiune și de prevederile art. 492 C.civ., nu se înscrie printre cele prevăzute de dispozițiile art. 644–649 C.civ. și nici de alte reglementări legale specifice domeniului de referință, pentru a dovedi calitatea de proprietar asupra respectivei rețele a unei persoane fizice care nu deține nici licență și nici capacitate energetică. În acest caz, pentru a putea reclama prerogativa de a-și exprima acordul la racordarea terților la rețeaua electrică, reclamantul trebuia, în lipsa oricărui titlu, să învestească instanța cu o acțiune în constatarea calității sale de proprietar asupra rețelei electrice, cu atât mai mult cu cât această calitate îi este contestată de partea adversă. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția a II-a civilă, Decizia nr. 2476 din 27 iunie 2014)

Considered by the authors of the Civil Code of 2009 a „traditional reality in Romania”, currently the engagement has become a „legal reality”, being regulated by Articles 266–270 of the Civil Code. Without „applauding” or „disavowing” the appearance of this unusual legal institution, we find that the reactions of the specialised literature have remained at their „first steps”. However, they are mostly marked by theses from the French doctrine as well, provided that, paradoxically, the French Civil Code, even if it defines the engagement (Article 515–8), does not devote to it other legal rules as well. Wishing to be a contribution to the „continuing effort of interpretation”, this study is based, primarily, on the logical and legal, systematic and systemic analysis of the provisions of Articles 266–270 of the Civil Code.

This study falls within the so much present problems of civil liability of professionals for malpractice. Starting from the arguments of a jurisprudential solution concerning the lawyer’s liability for the damage caused to the clients or to the third parties, the article intends to present the regulation, the special conditions, the legal nature and the foundation of this hypothesis of liability. By her conclusions the author supports the idea that the civil liability of the lawyer is a separate and autonomous professional civil liability.

The pre-contractual obligation to inform is one of the ethical instruments meant to ensure the durable and effective maintenance of the contract (contractual durability principle), a requirement which has acquired a considerable development owing to its functions: preventing a possible failure as concerns the maintaining of the durability and the effectiveness of the contract and building a contractual relation based on the active presence of the contracting parties. The provision of sufficiently accurate information will lead to making a decision to conclude or not the contract in full awareness of the facts. It is designed to extend also to the phase of contract performance, allowing the parties to think more deeply about the commitments they will make. But, in the pre-contractual phase, of negotiations, the future contracting parties only begin building a durable trust, which is achieved through dialogue and collaboration and which has normally extended also to the phase of performance of the contract. The pre-contractual obligation to inform tends to engage other legal means as well in order to come to decision-making in full awareness of the facts and in order to build, at the same time, a „bond of trust” intended to extend in time. Therefore, it is obvious the need to generalize this obligation, thus strengthening the coherence of rules (principle of coherence), this being achieved both by way of extending the application of the requirement of „good faith” and by special express rules specific to each category of contracts.

In this paper the author examines the legal regime of the plea of illegality regulated by Article 4 of the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004, as this text has been rather recently amended by Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of Law No 134/2010 on the [new] Civil Procedure Code. In this regard there are examined: the definition and the legal nature of the plea of illegality, its features, as well as the conditions of admissibility of the plea of illegality.

The Ombudsman is a fundamental institution of the state of law, meant to ensure the protection of natural or legal persons against the abusive manifestations of the public authorities. In this context, this study aims to analyze the main problems arisen in the practice of exercising the powers of this autonomous administrative authority, envisaging, in particular: the scope of public authorities and of the administrative acts falling within the scope of activity of this authority; the procedure for exercising the action for administrative disputes by the Ombudsman. Likewise, following the analysis of these aspects, there are formulated de lege ferenda proposals.

In this article there are examined comparatively the time limit and the grounds for appeal provided in the current legislation and the previous legislation, as well as the regulation in force. Likewise, within this paper there have been formulated a series of critical remarks, as well as de lege ferenda proposals, which have in view the amendment of the provisions of Article 410 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The paper can be useful for the academic environment, for the practitioners, as well as for the legislator.

One of the main innovations introduced by the new Criminal Procedure Code is the possibility of concluding a plea bargaining agreement between the defendant and the prosecutor. Where there is evidence to confirm that the defendant is the perpetrator of the deed subject to the criminal trial, and he admits the allegations against him, it is possible for the defendant and the prosecutor to mutually agree on the punishment, the method of execution of punishment, as well as on all other aspects related to the criminal side of the case. In this case, the role of the court will be limited only to verifying whether the concluded agreement fulfils or not the conditions provided by law and to confirm it or to reject it. Through this new institution it will decrease the duration of trials where the evidence produced during the criminal prosecution phase proves almost unequivocally the commission of acts by the defendant, allowing the courts to concentrate their resources on the really complex cases.