-
Concluded on 12 December 2015, and entering into force on 4 November 2016, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change establishes the new international legal regime of the global response to threat of climate change. Contributing to the application of the Framework Convention of 1992, the Agreement adds the objective of adaptation and breaks the tradition of the Kyoto Protocol (1997), by imposing a new approach in this field, having in its center the limitation to 2°C and, whenever possible, 1,5°C of the growth of global average temperature, in relation to preindustrial levels, determined national contributions, and a transparency mechanism in ensuring the compliance of the self-assumed commitments. Accepting climate change as a „common concern of mankind” with scientific legitimacy of the conventional process and a specific legal value, being neither a „convention” nor a „protocol”, the Agreement has a universal nature, and it completes and transforms the international legal regime of the global climate action. Innovating principles are consecrated: intergenerational equity, climate justice or progression principle, new market mechanisms, with limited action, the facilitating mechanism, periodical evaluation, et al. An important role in imposing the new strategy and the new mechanism of action in climatic matters is held by the negotiations related to the post-2015 Conferences of Parties, designed to establish the „roadmap” and the proceedings for the preparation and enforcement, after 2020, of the Paris Agreement. Part of the new international conventional context regarding the new global challenges, the Agreement completes and updates the climate regime, as part of the international environmental law, bearing important specificities. -
This study deals with a new institution in the Romanian criminal legislation, namely the plea agreement, which is a deal of the prosecutor with the major defendant concerning the offence, the evidence, the form of guilt and the punishment imposed, all taking the form of a simplified procedure. By combining the theoretical and the practical aspects, the article is of great interest to those who apply the criminal law. Being written in a way which transcends the already known generalities regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code, the study specifically concerns the particularities and the difficulties which accompany the application of this new legal mechanism. -
Fapta asiguratului de a nu renunța la calitatea de parte civilă, deși a primit plata despăgubirilor de la asigurător, nu are semnificația unui act prin care se împiedică realizarea dreptului de regres al asigurătorului, astfel că nu se pune problema angajării răspunderii în condițiile art. 2210 alin. (2) C.civ.
-
The authors plead for the distinct regulation of the manifestly illegal acts and measures showing that their legal treatment requires operative sanctions and their removal in due time having regard to their implications for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Taking into account the implications increased by the latest changes of the institution of the initiation and continuation of the criminal prosecution there are pointed out some inconsistencies of the criminal processual legislation with the provisions of the Constitution and of the European Convention of Human Rights, expressing some criticism of unconstitutionality. Thus they criticize the obligativity to initiate criminal prosecution „in rem” even when the authors are indicated or known, and make some „de lege ferenda” proposals, for the concordance of Article 304 (2), Article 305 (1), (2) and (3) and Article 339 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Code with the provisions of the Constitution. -
In consequence of Romania’s accession to the European Union, in recent years there have been adopted a series of laws (the Law No 315/2005 and the Law No 17/2014 and others) which establish a series of new legal provisions with reference to the acquisition, in Romania, of the right to private property and its subdivisions over land by the foreign citizens and by the stateless persons. In this study, the author makes an interesting analysis of these new Romanian legal establishments, to which it is also added the Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (entered into force on 17 August 2015) on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of successions and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession. -
The phrase actio libera in causa designates that situation in which the perpetrator, at the time of committing a deed stipulated by the criminal law, was in a situation that excludes the imputable character of the deed. However, it must be emphasized that, at a previous moment, when the perpetrator was not under the incidence of such causes, he triggered or allowed the emergence of some states of fact that would eliminate the imputable character of the deed. In such a hypothesis, the criminal doctrine from Romania is unanimous in accepting that the person who causes his own state of incapacity will be liable under the criminal law. In order to argue the possibility that a person, at the time of committing a typical action or inaction, be liable under the criminal law, the authors of criminal law in our country have adopted the model of exception or extraordinary imputation. According to this system, the perpetrator will be liable under the criminal law for causing his own state of incapacity. Thus, the imputability, in the case of the construction of actio libera in causa, will not be analyzed at the time of committing the criminal deed, but in relation to the moment when the perpetrator caused his state of incapacity. The construction actio libera in causa, from our point of view, covers only certain hypotheses in which the perpetrator creates the appearance of existence of a cause of imputability (intoxication, irresponsibility, physical or moral constraint), and not those hypotheses, in which the perpetrator provokes the existence of a justifying cause.
-
-
Din interpretarea dispozițiilor art. 1847 și următoarele și a art. 1890 C.civ. din 1864 rezultă că prescripția achizitivă trebuie opusă doar fostului proprietar al imobilului în litigiu, în considerarea efectului juridic al uzucapiunii de sancțiune civilă față de titularul nediligent care a permis ieșirea bunului din patrimoniul său. În măsura în care însă nu este posibilă identificarea fostului proprietar al terenului ce face obiectul cererii, ori a altor persoane care ar fi interesate în contestarea uzucapiunii sau acesta a decedat și nu s-a dezbătut succesiunea vacantă, calitatea procesuală pasivă se prezumă, prin dispozițiile legii, că aparține unității administrativ-teritoriale, în a cărei rază teritorială se află imobilul, ca titulare ale patrimoniului imobiliar. Prin urmare, legitimarea procesuală pasivă a unității administrativ-teritoriale nu decurge, în mod arbitrar, din faptul neidentificării unui alt pârât, ci se întemeiază pe dispozițiile art. 26 din Legea fondului funciar nr. 18/1991, relative la caracterul potențial de bun fără stăpân al terenului în litigiu. Altfel s-ar putea ajunge în situația particulară a inexistenței unei persoane care să pretindă un drept de proprietate asupra nemișcătorului, în calitate de proprietar sau de moștenitor al proprietarului inițial al terenului, la respingerea acțiunii în constatarea dobândirii dreptului de proprietate, prin efectul prescripției achizitive, deși sunt îndeplinite condițiile legale pentru a uzucapa, pe considerentul că unitatea administrativ-teritorială este lipsită de legitimare procesuală pasivă, ceea ce ar echivala cu lipsirea reclamantului de orice posibilitate de valorificare a dreptului său. (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția I civilă, Decizia nr. 2470 din 19 noiembrie 2020) -
Din prevederile art. 34 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 165/2013, rezultă că în vederea soluționării dosarelor de despăgubire, legiuitorul a stabilit un termen de 60 de luni de la data intrării în vigoare a legii. Rezultă că formularea unei cereri înaintea expirării acestui termen este prematură. Această concluzie este întărită de dispozițiile art. 35 alin. (2), potrivit cărora în cazul în care entitatea învestită de lege nu soluționează decizia în termenele prevăzute la art. 33 și 34, persoana care se consideră îndreptățită se poate adresa instanței de judecată.” (Curtea de Apel Cluj, Secția I civilă, Decizia nr. 2776 din 10.12.2015)
-
-
-
