-
Proportionality of the enforcement measures constitutes, in essence, a fundamental principle of the civil enforcement procedure, which, although it does not have a regulation in terminis recognized in the Civil Procedure Code, already knows, at regulatory level, the valences of a principle, following only to be assimilated by the doctrine, by the practice and, consequently, by the legislator. Although it could be argued that proportionality is subsumed to the general principle of the right to a fair trial, we consider that it claims its own individuality at the level of the fundamental thesis leading the enforcement process, as compared to the specificity of the measures involved, the fairness of the procedure following to be appreciated by reference to the level at which all the other principles are observed, being a corollary thereof. The procedural guarantees which they enjoy, the remedies and the legally recognized consequences are elements that turn, therefore, the proportionality of the enforcement measures into a basic principle of the enforcement, on which a fair procedure is built, thus giving full expression to the valorisation of the rights and fundamental freedoms of the individual. -
In the study it is emphasized that the main effect of the fidejussion is represented by the obligation of the fidejussor to execute the obligation of the debtor, in case the latter does not fulfil it voluntarily. I have shown that by invoking the exception of the discussion, the conventional or legal fidejussor uses the faculty to ask the creditor, who has started the prosecution against him, to pursue first the assets of the principal debtor, within the limits of the value of the principal debtor’s assets, which the fidejussor will indicate to the creditor. This means of defence by which the fidejussor seeks its exemption from the execution in whole or in part of the obligation of guarantee, derives, on the one hand, from the ancillary nature of the obligation of guarantee and, on the other hand, from the very legal relation of fidejussion.
-
The present study intends to analyze the principle of preeminence of law and a few perspectives over this principle, especially the common law perspective. The author starts from the premise that the principle of preeminence of law is a common European value on which any democratic state must be founded, being the essence of the state of law and also an element of the common heritage of the Member States of the Council of Europe. The author has, as a research hypothesis, the fact that the history of Romania and its political course in the last century raises problems of understanding a philosophy based on the concept of preeminence of law. Coming after a period of communism, in many respects our country has passed from one extreme to the other, from many restrictions to too much freedom and legislative or power void, from a typology of totalitarian regulation to a form sometimes too liberal, which causes a functional instability of the state as a whole. One can notice that the elaborated study has as objectives the analysis of the general concepts recognized in common law regarding the preeminence of the law for the development of the Romanian legal doctrine in order to deeply understand and fully implement this principle in our legal system, and – more broadly – in our society. Regarding the research methods, the comparative and the quantitative method have been predominantly used, with elements that refer to the sociological and historical method. Notions and concepts specific to common law-type systems have been presented in order to identify possible solutions for taking over and integrating these concepts in our legal system. From the point of view of the results of the research, it has been concluded that the preeminence of law is aspirational and, therefore, it is a matter of degree. From the perspective of our country, we have shown that we have not yet succeeded in overcoming the horrors of the past, with reference here to the ideologies, philosophies and mentalities that have become part of us in the last century. Things are constantly evolving, but we have failed to achieve the level of civilization and understanding that exists in true democracies, one of the causes being the inconsistency of the choices we have made in the last 32 years. Regarding the theoretical and practical implications of the study, they consist in understanding some specific concepts developed in the common law-type systems, the need to implement and fully assume, at society level, the principle of the preeminence of law, with all its components and mechanisms, as well as of the awareness of the current historical moment, in which we must progress at the level of society towards the ideal of a developed and happy society.
-
-
-
-
Prin renunțarea la dreptul de a invoca accesiunea, proprietarul fondului abandonează prerogativa folosinței terenului în favoarea proprietarului construcției, pe toată durata de existență a acesteia, generând un mod atipic de naștere a dreptului de superficie, acceptat în sistemul Codului civil din 1864 și prevăzut expres în sistemul actualului Cod civil la art. 693 alin. (4) teza I. Așadar, în forma sa deplină, superficia ca dezmembrământ al dreptului de proprietate imobiliară are în conținutul său proprietatea asupra construcției și prerogativa folosinței terenului (ca atribut al proprietății, iar nu doar o simplă stare de fapt protejată juridic, atribut transmis pe durata de existență a construcției de către proprietarul fondului către constructor). Or, așa cum am arătat mai sus, prin contractele de închiriere pârâta a transmis folosința terenului ca și obiect al unei obligații personale pentru o anumită durată, și nu ca atribut al proprietății, pe toată durata existenței construcției. (Curtea de Apel Timișoara, Secția I civilă, Decizia nr. 114 din 30 iunie 2021, www.rolii.ro)
-
According to Article 41 (1) of the Criminal Code, if the offender convicted by a final judgment is subsequently tried for a concurrent offence, the previously established punishment, under the conditions of concurrence of offences, shall be separated, the increase shall be removed and it shall be merged with the newly applied punishment, adding a new increase. In compliance with Article 10 of the Law No 187/2012, when at least one of the offences in the structure of plurality has been committed under the new law, the sanctioning treatment of plurality shall be applied according to the new law, even if for the other offences the punishment was established according to the former, more favourable law. This legal provision comes in conflict with the principle of non-retroactivity of the criminal law.
-
Starting from a legal classification found in a situation from the judicial practice, the author of this study addresses the delicate issue constantly generating contradictory solutions of the relation between the abuse of office and other offences from the same category, committed by the same deed, applying the rules of ideal (formal) concurrence of offences. The arguments are convincing and allow the conclusion that, in such situations, it cannot be retained the commission of a concurrence of offences, whereas the abuse of service, whether there are involved deeds committed under the incidence of the current Criminal Code or of the previous Criminal Code, maintains its subsidiary character, the incrimination text which defines it becoming incident only insofar as it cannot be retained another offence which violates the social relations that constitute legal object for these service offences.
-
The article addresses the newly introduced legal institution of verification of the legality and lawfulness of protective measures during the criminal trial, which institutes the obligation of the criminal judicial body to periodically analyze whether the legal and factual grounds on which it was previously taken or maintained continue to exist, following to be ordered its maintenance, cancellation, extension or limitation. Through the novelty of the subject under analysis, the study will contribute to the outlining of the guidelines of judicial practice in this unique legal matter.
-
Family relationships are an area of great interest due to its intimacy and sensitivity. Because of the unpredictability of modern life, many families are falling apart. Thus, the issue of dissolution of marriage, whether through divorce or separation, is of paramount importance for modern society. Both the European Union and some Member States, especially the predominantly Catholic ones, have adapted to religious realities and regulated spouses’ separation through secular laws. The purpose of this article is to reveal that the Romanian law has the institution of spouses’ separation which produces, however, only effects of canon law, and not of civil law. The methods used in support of our thesis are analysis and synthesis. In Romania, the state recognized the Canonical Codes of the Roman-Catholic and Oriental Churches that provide for separation. But it denies any civil, secular effects of the institution. It is high time for the Romanian legislator to regulate the institution of spouses’ separation whether by altering the Civil Code or through a concordat between the state and the Holy See. The secular effects of spouses’ separation will protect the religious freedom of the Catholic people and the traditions of the Roman Catholic denomination. Moreover, introducing legal separation in the Romanian law will ensure a better application of the private international law of the European Union which provides for the international jurisdiction and for the law applicable to such separation.
-
Arbitrability is the entry point of arbitration: it identifies those cases which can be settled by way of arbitration and in which the parties can exclude court procedures and state courts. This article examines, in light of the applicable international treaties, the choice-of-law rule that determines the law applicable to arbitrability and, in order to establish this choice-of-law rule, analyzes the purpose of arbitrability. It argues that arbitrability should be conceived as a question of competence and not as a question emerging from public policy. It follows from this thesis that the application of the law of the forum (lex fori), the dominant approach in international treaty law, is not justified and the exclusion of arbitrability is warranted only in cases which belong to the exclusive competence of the courts of or raise real problems of public policy for the forum.
