Inconveniences of neighbourhood are regulated autonomously in Article 630 of the new Romanian Civil Code, as judicial limits of the right of property. The paper analyzes the inconveniences of neighbourhood in the light of the relation to the abuse of right, because it has been for a long time the main instrument of settlement of the conflicts arisen in the state of neighbourhood. In this regard the author emphasizes that, unlike the abuse of right that involves, in all its forms of manifestation, the existence of guilt and the illicit act, by engaging the tort civil liability, the inconveniences of neighbourhood oblige the owner to provide reparation only if they are abnormal and are produced by the normal and licit exercise of the right. The foundation of the obligation to repair the created inconvenience is equity, the only one that can adjust to the conditions required by the legal situation specific to abnormal disturbances of neighbourhood. By applying equity, the court sets the judicial limits in the exercise of property, separate from the legal limits or from the conventional ones, expressly regulated by the new Civil Code, for private interest.

This paper presents a brief analysis of the problems raised by the offence of theft. The authors emphasize, on the one hand, the close connection between these problems and some errors occurred in the civil theory of possession, and, on the other hand, some shortcomings of the current definition of the offence of theft. Similarly, there are presented some possible corrections, both at theoretical level and at legislative level.

In this study the author points out that, although in Romania we can not talk about a real regime of liability for the inconveniences of neighbourhood, but rather about an identity between this form of liability and the one for the abuse of law, however the social, economic, cultural realities, etc. impose such regulation. From a legal point of view, there is no exact definition of this notion, reference being often made in the legal doctrine to the sociological studies that have examined neighbourhood relations or to geographic studies, in which it is contained the essence of this notion from a spatial point of view. The author points out that neighbourhood can be defined as a state of facts that captures the co-existence of some persons, of some assets, whether movable or immovable, configuring those spaces of conflict and discussing proximities and distances. The Civil Code establishes precise rules on environmental protection and good neighbourliness, considered to be legal limits to private property right, thus, according to the provisions of Article 603 of the Civil Code: „The property right imposes the compliance with the duties concerning the environmental protection and the ensuring of good neighbourliness, as well as the compliance with the other duties which, according to law or custom, belong to the owner.” The new regulation nuances certain aspects which, in practice, raise many problems; the following are examples: the use of waters, the roof droplet, the distance and the intermediate works for certain constructions, works and plantations, the view of the neighbour’s property, the right of passage, and finally the judicial limits are regulated. These judicial limits determine expressis verbis the consequences of exceeding the normal boundaries of the neighbourhood, more precisely, if the owner causes, by exercising his right, greater inconveniences than the normal one in the neighbourhood relations, the court may, on grounds of equity, compel him to pay compensation for the benefit of the injured person, and to restore the previous situation whenever possible.

Take Ionescu was one of Romania’s most remarkable politicians at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the next one, especially before and during the First World War. He was active in politics over 30 years, especially within Conservative Party, whose leader wanted to become, but without success, the competition being intense along with great figures of the Romanian politics of those times: Petre Carp, Alexandru Marghiloman, Nicolae Filipescu, George Gr. Cantacuzino and others. He was one of the brightest orator in the Romanian Parliament, being known and feared by the close logic of his interventions and his great popularity, which attracted close to him many and valuable persons, among them: Constantin Dissescu, Nicolae Titulescu, the historian Xenopol, Dr. C. Istrati, etc. Among his qualities were seriousness and competence, approaches on multiple plans, which was why he was minister in seven governments and, towards the end of his career, was for the short time Prime Minister of the Government. He formed a dissident Conservative Party, which played an important role in the first decades of the 20th century, participating in the exercise of power with other political parties. Take Ionescu was one of the most conscious fighters for the cause of the Great Union of all the Romanians, tirelessly militating for participation in the World War I, along with the Entente countries, which they supported. He was intended to play an important role at the Peace Conference in Paris, but vanities and politicking games made to be absent from this event, where his contribution would have been particularly useful. In the end, as Foreign Minister in the Government of General Averescu, Take Ionescu was the architect of the Balkan Pact, which his disciple Nicolae Titulescu put into practice.

In this article, the author analyzes extensively the regulations contained in the new Civil Code and in the special legislation referring to the means of identification of the natural person. The author’s points of view rely on a rich speciality literature and on an extended judicial practice relevant for the identification of a person by civil means. Each attribute of identification of the person is discussed and presented in detail, so that the reader may obtain a complete information on the subjectmatters dealt with. When discussing the problems of identification of the natural person, the author also resorts to the conception of European law in the matter, reflected at the level of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, also ratified by Romania, as well as of the ECHR case law on various aspects that are related to the private life of the persons and are relevant as attributes of their identification. Within the study, there are presented extensively the name and the domicile of the person established in the civil legislation as attributes of identification of the person.

In this study the author gives an overview of the facts of unlawful fell down and theft of trees, of their incrimination as offences or contraventions, analyzing afterwards the incidence of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in this matter, the study ending in some de lege ferenda proposals and best-practice proposals on problematic aspects in this matter.