-
Starting from a finding of the relevant division within the European Commission (i.e., in present-day Europe, women earn on average 17.8% of men’s earnings for the same jobs), the author conducts an extensive and interesting analysis on legislation encompassing primary law (treaties) and secondary law (regulations, directives) of the European Union, as well as on the jurisprudence of the European Union Court of Justice regarding the prohibition of discrimination between men and women in terms of remuneration (salary) (income gender gap). In this context, the author reviews the Romanian legislation and the Romanian Constitutional Court’s resolutions on this issue, altogether. -
The author analyzes the rules of Directive 2001/23/EC of March 12, 2001 on the appropriation of the European Union Member States’ laws relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or establishments, by reference to the rules of the Labor Code (republished) and the provisions of Law no. 64/2006 on the protection of employees’ rights for transfers of undertakings, business or parts thereof; this comparative analysis reached some interesting conclusions useful both for theorists, and practitioners. -
In this study, the author makes an analysis – partly critical – of the provisions of Law no. 50/2011 on the performance of certain seasonal activities by day-workers, focusing on the correlation of this law with the European regulation in the field (Directive 1999/70/EC), noting that a series of provisions of Law no. 52/2011 should not be interpreted literally, but according to a „consistent interpretation” in order to avoid a series of contradictions and inconsistencies between the said directive and Law. 52/2011. -
Further to the analysis of article 289 (3) of National Education Law no. 1/ 2001, the author reaches the conclusion that this piece of legislation (according to which the teaching or research staff of higher education institutions may carry on their activity after retirement provided that individual employment agreements are concluded for a limited – annual – period) breaches the European rule in the field (Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999). Therefore, if a fourth agreement is successive, this time, such ope legis becomes concluded for a unlimited period. -
In this paper the author makes a comparative analysis of Art.72 (“notifying the enforcement of collective redundancy”) and Art. 74 (prohibition of new employment subsequent to collective redundancies, employees right to reemployment) of the Labor Code (Law no. 53/2003, republished on May 18, 2011), texts related to the Council Directive no. 98/59/EC of July 20, 1998. In this respect, the author concludes that although usually the said texts of the Labor Code are consistent with the aforementioned Directive, however, the amending / supplementing of the Labor Code is required to imperatively establish a mandatory form of employees representation outside the union organization, taking into account that the “employees representatives” institution (Articles 221 to 226 of the Labor Code) is currently optionally governed (and not mandatory), and only where the employer exceeding 20 employees had not constituted representative unions. -
În cele ce urmează, vom comenta două hotărâri ale Curții de Justiție a Uniunii Europene, ambele pronunțate în materia dreptului la liberă circulație și, respectiv, a securității sociale, în cadrul procedurii chestiunii preliminare.
-
In the present study we will make some critical comments on two judicial decisions – a decision of the Romanian Constitutional Court and a decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union – with impact on a problem of high importance for Romania: the nature, the character and the legal force of the Decision 928/2006 of the European Commission (which institutes the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism) and of the recommendations of the Commission included in the reports issued within the above-mentioned mechanism, the compatibility with the Union law of the legal provisions concerning the Section for the investigation of the offences committed within the judicial system. The decision of the Court of Justice was given prior to that of the Constitutional Court, within the procedure of the preliminary ruling unleashed before more Romanian administrative jurisdictions, and the control of the Constitutional Court was unleashed with the aim at establishing the unconstitutionality of the legal provision concerning the above-mentioned section. Although the Constitutional Court knew about the decision of the Court of Justice, which ruled that, if the law is found by the national jurisdictions to be incompatible with the Union law, it must be set aside in the respective litigations, by virtue of the (total) supremacy of the Union law, the constitutional jurisdiction declared the constitutionality of the law and, more than that, stated that the ordinary jurisdictions are not permitted to set aside the law, because the supremacy of the Constitution is not questioned by the adherence to the Union and by the Union law, the latter being superior only to the infraconstitutional laws. So, the point is: of the two decisions, which one must the jurisdictions apply? Which one is superior to another? -
Prezentul comentariu este generat de o notă critică la Decizia nr. 3915/2013 a Înaltei Curți de Casație și Justiție, Secția a II-a civilă, pronunțată în Dosarul nr. 2342/111/20071, notă critică publicată pe site-ul Juridice.ro, în „Revista de note și studii juridice”, la data de 15 august 20142. -
This study proposes a thorough and precise examination of the provisions of the present Civil Code regarding the institution of the contract, especially, its drafting mechanism. The objective of our research concerns the reference made to the innovative items, but also a critical view regarding the possible discrepancies existing between the legal text and the judicial practice, respectively the concepts developed by the specialty literature under the pressure of the Civil Code of the year 1864. The approach is based upon a permanent tendency to refer to the comparative law, especially the European law and the great projects of unifying the regulation of the international commercial contracts, UNIDROIT Principles and the Principles of European Contract Law. We notice that one of the basic ideas taken into account by the editors of the Civil Code is that of „unifying” the civil law and the commercial law, by adopting the solutions proposed by other Codes, such as the Swiss or the Italian code. The assembly of the regulations applicable to the mechanism of the contract drafting has to be construed from this perspective. The usefulness is undisputable considering that the distinction cannot be justified at this level in a modern society. Likewise, it is required to specify that in the matter of drafting the contract, the good faith principle was raised to the rank of an „axiological summum”, being present both in the negotiations-related regulations and in the rigorous and detailed provisions of the offer and of its acceptance. -
10 December 2016 marks 60 years from the date when the General Assembly of the United Nations Organisation opened for signature (and 50 years from the date when they entered into force) the two international covenants on human rights: International Covenant on civil and political rights and International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights. These, along with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Organisation Charter, make up the hard core of the protection of human rights, within the United Nations Organisation (UNO). The 50th anniversary of their entry into force is equally a reason for balance, namely reflection and projection into the future. Thus, in 1966, the design of the two different conventional instruments, corresponding to the two traditional categories of human rights (civil and political rights, on the one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights, on the other hand), was based on their different legal nature, on the East-West ideological divisions, or on the necessity to treat them differently in the process of implementation at state level: the immediate implementation (civil and political rights) v. progressive realization (economic, social and cultural rights). However, the initial situation did not stay within the same parameters, but it gradually evolved. Although initially conceived as „political obligations” in the economic, social and cultural fields and rather left at the discretion of StatesParties, the economic, social and cultural rights have acquired, in time, through the work carried on by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), a position that allows them to claim, in the next 15 years, a significant role in the process of implementation of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. In such conditions, in this paper, the author initiates an evaluation of the doctrine of economic, social and cultural rights in the past two and a half decades, as well as of the way in which CESCR has built the „profile” of these rights, in this regard being evaluated two of the work methods used by CESCR, namely: General comments and the new LOIPR procedure – List of Issues Prior to Reporting. -
The author, after explaining the „valorism” and „value debt” concepts, enters into details on the issue of aggregation of default interests (art. 1088 of the Romanian Civil Code – 1865 –, still into force), reaching a conclusion, which agrees to a minority juridical doctrine, that the interest may be aggregated to a value debt.
-
Analyzing the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights on freedom of expression (Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), the author reveals the close connection between the concept of States’ margin of appreciation (paragraph 2 of Art. 10 of the Convention) and the quality of the Convention as “a living instrument”. Therefore, the purpose of the study is precisely the dialecticism of the relationship between the “freedom of expression” (proclaimed by the Convention) and the exercise of that freedom “that carries with it duties and responsibilities” and which, under national law, may be subject to “such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties” (granted under Art. 10 of the Convention, as well). In light of this line of thinking, the author carries forth an extensive case law of the European Court of Human Rights, expression of a broad relevant casuistry.
