Loading...
  • The article proposes solutions in the case of concurrence between the reopening of the criminal trial in case of judgment in the absence of convicted person and the resumption of the time limit for appeal, and after an analysis of the two procedures and a comparative analysis of the ordinary and extraordinary means of appeal, it concludes that the reopening of the criminal trial is an extraordinary means of appeal.
  • The judicial individualization of the sentence shall be carried out by a complex operation using all those individualization criteria set forth by law (general and special criteria); the need for taking into consideration all the grounds for sentence modification is included within these criteria, as well. Drawn by this need, the Romanian Criminal Code into force (since 1968) contains regulations regarding the manner in which the various grounds for sentence modification must be enforced, when they concur, regulations contained in the provisions of art. 80. Likewise, the new Romanian Criminal Code contains such regulations in art. 79. In this study, the authors have emphasized several systems of sentence determination in case of the concurrence between the grounds for sentence modification. Both the Criminal Code into force and the new Criminal Code adopted an objective criterion concerning the manner in which the various grounds for sentence modification must be enforced, being sensitive to multiple interpretations and contradictory solutions. The Romanian Criminal Code of 2004 – abrogated, before becoming effective, through the new Criminal Code – which forwarded a system based upon a subjective criterion, by granting the judge the freedom to assess the predominance (prevalence) of the grounds for sentence modification and to give them the due legal effect. From the point of view of the authors of the study, this system seems to be more adequate to settle the problems raised by the concurrence between the grounds for sentence modification.
  • In this study the author examines the legal institution of the politics-related conviction from various points of view: legal nature, regulatory manner, effects, similarities and differences to the causes removing criminal liability or consequences of conviction.
  • The need to analyze the condition of guilt in engaging the legal liability of the physician does not result only from the ECHR Judgment in Ioniță Case, which ruled that the physician’s liability itself is based on the notion of medical negligence, but especially because of its specific aspects. According to recent practice, the intensity of medical guilt in the degree of culpa levissima is able to lead to de facto exoneration from criminal liability (through a symbolic sanction) in order to focus on repairing the victim’s prejudice. The consequence of changing the vision on the medical legal liability from a punitive-criminal liability of the physician to a reparative liability facilitates the perception of the French conception of the contractual liability of the health unit. This does not remove the personal liability of the employed physician, but limits it to a psychic attitude of elusion of the system of cooperation and control of the health unit, which brings it closer to the indirect intention. Hence the need to distinguish between indirect intention and guilt with forethought (recklessness), which in its turn is different from guilt without forethought (negligence).
  • The paper analyzes the conditions for exercising the revision in the criminal trial, respectively the judgments subject to revision, the category of persons who can exercise it, the time limits of declaration, the form in which the application and its content must be made. The study relates to the case law of the national courts before and after the entry into force of the new Criminal Procedure Code, as well as to the relevant provisions of other European legislations. At the same time, there are considered the provisions of the Draft Law for amending and completing the Criminal Procedure Code adopted in the summer of 2018, respectively PL-x No 373/2018.
  • The provisions of art.1538 para. (1) of the new Civil Code define the criminal clause as being that according to which the parties set forth that the debtor undertakes to pay a certain allowance in case of the non-performance of the main obligation, and para. (4) of the same article sets forth: “the creditor may request the performance of the criminal clause without the obligation to prove any prejudice.” In order to grant the criminal clause, it is necessary to meet the following conditions: the existence of a criminal clause validly established, the non-performance, the inadequate performance or the delay performance of the contractual obligation, the debtor’s fault and his putting in default or being in default de jure. At the same time, the penalty cannot be requested if the performance of the obligation has become impossible for grounds which are not imputable to the debtor, such as the force majeure, the act of God, the deed of the victim or of a third party.
  • In this study, the author examines the problems of granting in Romania the subsidiary protection for the asylum seekers in case of generalized violence in situations of armed conflict, stating that, according to the internal and international legal terminology, the subsidiary protection is a form of international protection from which the asylum seekers can benefit. In this respect there are presented: the legal framework – international, European and internal – in the matter, as well as the conditions of granting the protection in question for the asylum seekers in case of generalized violence in situations of armed conflict.
  • Among the means of protection of a creditor’s rights, the present Civil Code regulates the (Paulian) revocatory action within Articles 1562–1565. This civil action has been regulated also in the previous Romanian Civil Code. However, in this study the author examines exhaustively the admissibility conditions of the revocatory action in the light of the present Romanian Civil Code, which entered into force on 1 October 2011.
  • Through this study we have made a thorough analysis of the conditions of admissibility of the special cancellation (revocation) action regulated by the provisions of Article 117 of the Law No 85/2014 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and of insolvency, as well as an analysis of the possibility of cancelling (revoking) any fraudulent act concluded by the debtor in the 2 years prior to the opening of the insolvency procedure. Likewise, we have analyzed what operations concluded, in the two years prior to the opening of the procedure, with the persons who have legal relationships with the debtor may be cancelled and the benefits recovered, if they are to the detriment of the creditors, except for the acts concluded in good faith in the execution of an agreement with the creditors, concluded as a result of extrajudicial negotiations for restructuring the debtor’s debts.
  • Through this study we have made a thorough analysis of the conditions of admissibility of the special cancellation (revocation) action regulated by the provisions of Article 117 of the Law No 85/2014 on the procedures for preventing insolvency and of insolvency, as well as an analysis of the possibility of cancelling (revoking) any fraudulent act concluded by the debtor in the 2 years prior to the opening of the insolvency procedure. Likewise, we have analyzed what operations concluded, in the two years prior to the opening of the procedure, with the persons who have legal relationships with the debtor may be cancelled and the benefits recovered, if they are to the detriment of the creditors, except for the acts concluded in good faith in the execution of an agreement with the creditors, concluded as a result of extrajudicial negotiations for restructuring the debtor’s debts
  • The recordings made by technical means have not constituted, at least in civil matters, ever since the appearance of the devices that made them possible, an admissible evidence, not being regulated as such by the legislator in the past. In the new regulations, starting with the Law No 217/2003, including in the new Civil Procedure Code, in the conditions of the extended use of electronic means, both in the institutional framework and in the private life, the daily realities have imposed the use of the recordings with technical means as evidence. However, by operating a generalization, the possibility that the data of any kind to be fixed on a computer-based media has led to the penetration of this kind of probation both in the evidence with written documents, in the form of computer-based written documents, and in that of material means of evidence. The inclusion of the recordings, generically speaking, also in the category of material means of evidence generates problems both in terms of identifying their legal nature, with implications on their administration and storage regime, and in terms of establishing their admissibility conditions. The latter also raise the question of establishing the extent of the probationary area related thereto, respectively whether it should be restricted only to proving those legal relations which the facts of legal relevance involve, as well as which categories among these fall within the scope of circumstances likely to be proved in this way.
Folosim fisierele tip cookie-uri pentru a va oferi cea mai buna experienta de utilizare a website-ului. Navigand in continuare ori ramanand doar pe aceasta pagina va exprimati acordul asupra folosirii cookie-urilor. Daca doriti sa renuntati la acestea, va rugam sa consultati Politica de Utilizare a Cookie-urilor. Anumite parti ale website-ului nu vor mai functiona corect daca stergeti toate cookie-urile. Citește mai mult... Ok