-
The question of the public legal aid in civil matters was settled by the Government of Romania by issuing the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 51/2008 on legal aid in civil matters. However, the regulation issued in relation to public legal aid in civil matters fails to cover all situations that may arise in legal practice, one of the unregulated issues referring to the applications made by several people together, in which case the court fees stamp are due jointly. -
Starting from a decision made in the interest of the law by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, which stated that the terms regulated in art. 278 para. 3 and in art. 2781 para. 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code, for exercising the remedy of complaint against resolutions or ordinances of the prosecutor for not sending a case to justice, can only represent peremptory procedural terms, the article analyses the consequences on the fairness of the procedure of non-settlement by the hierarchically superior prosecutor, within the deadline provided by law, of the complaint against the solution of not sending a case to justice, reaching the conclusion that the legal text under review should be reconfigured, either by way of clarifying the nature of the term provided in art. 277 of the Criminal Procedure Code as a lapse term, or by way of linking the term referred to in art. 2781 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the time of communication of the solution of the hierarchically superior prosecutor, to avoid “deviations” from the fairness principle. -
This study analyzes the situation – which is not expressly regulated by the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – in which, after the claimant notified the European Court of Human Rights (and until 1998 the Commission within such Court), the respective claimant demises. The study takes into account a rich history of relevant cases, resulting from the case law of the Court/Commission. In the end, after examining the mentioned cases, a series of conclusions may be briefly deducted. -
Constitutional case law has got an important influence over the normative regulations and the legal system in general, due to the multitude of ways in which the Constitutional Court can intervene in order to modulate and harmonize legal provisions and the authorities’ actions with the rules and principles enshrined in the Basic Law. The risk of sanctioning the disregarding the constitutional exigencies, either in terms of formal conditions or in what concerns the fund rules, is a factor of accountability of the legislature. Therefore, the role the constitutional review plays in increasing the quality of laws and its positive effects on the lawmaking process should reinforce the importance of the Constitutional Court in the institutional state’s architecture. -
Scurte observații de ordin istoric. 1. Sahara Occidentală. Teritoriul Saharei Occidentale, aflat în nord-vestul Africii și situat între Maroc, Algeria, Mauritania și Oceanul Atlantic, este disputat cu statut incert în dreptul internațional. O parte însemnată din acest teritoriu este controlată de Maroc, fără ca Marocul să exercite toate atributele suveranității sale asupra acestui teritoriu, în timp ce o parte mai mică se află sub controlul Frontului Polisario (sprijinit de Algeria), mișcare de eliberare a Saharei Occidentale a cărei legitimitate a fost recunoscută de ONU. Acest teritoriu este de mulți ani în atenția ONU care a propus organizarea unui referendum în vederea autodeterminării sale sub controlul Națiunilor Unite. Referendumul nu a mai avut loc1 -
In the matter of cases of application of the measure of preventive arrest, as in the case of other institutions, the new Romanian Criminal Procedure Code contains new regulations and takes over, in a limited extent, some provisions of the previous Criminal Procedure Code (of 1968). In this study, the authors analyzes the institution of preventive detention, with special reference to the cases of application of this measure, by presenting some critical issues and by proposing some improvements to the new regulation. -
In the matter of conditions of application of the preventive arrest measure, as in the case of other institutions, the new Criminal Procedure Code contains new regulations and takes over, to a small extent, some provisions of the previous Criminal Procedure Code (of 1968). The new Criminal Procedure Code has regulated the preventive detention in a single modality: the detention of the defendant, namely of the person against whom the criminal action has been set in motion. In this study, the authors analyze the institution of preventive detention, with special reference to the conditions of application of this measure, by presenting some critical aspects and by proposing some improvements of the new regulation. Key -
In this article, we analyze the stages of adoption and repeal of the Law No 169/2017, in relation to the dynamics of the level of employment of the penitentiaries and the ECHR jurisprudence. We identify the main undesirable effects of the application of the compensatory appeal, determined by the abrupt redefinition of the paradigm for the execution of the sentence of deprivation of liberty, with implications including on the (re)integration of the post-detention.
-
Recently, Brașov Court of Appeal ruled that that the legislator listed in Article 5 (3) of the Law No 55/2020 the measures to reduce the impact of the type of risk and that the Government decisions issued in execution of the law impose certain limitations on the activit y of economic operators, the observance of which requires the presentation by individuals of a certificate proving vaccination, infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus or a negative test. Also, the Court considered that the provisions contained in the Government decisions do not add additional conditions and do not contain additional restrictions or limitations of fundamental rights, these restrictions being regulated in the Law No 55/2020 as a formal act of the Parliament. However, as we will show in our analysis, the provisions of the Law on some measures to prevent and combat the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are unconstitutional insofar as they are interpreted as allowing the restriction of the right to privacy by the processing of personal health data by economic operators, data contained in the EU Digital COVID Certificate. The unconstitutionality of the law derives from the violation of the provisions of Article 1 (5) of the Romanian Constitution in its aspect regarding the quality of the law, from the violation of the provisions of Article 53 (1) in its aspect regarding the restriction only by law of the exercise of some fundamental rights and freedoms and from the violation of the provisions of Article 26 on its side regarding the guarantees associated with the right to intimate, family and private life. The domestic use of the EU Digital COVID Certificate is also unconstitutional in relation to the provisions of Article 115 (6) of the Romanian Constitution on its side regarding the field of regulation of emergency ordinances. Thus, the main conclusion is that the judgment of Brașov Court of Appeal was given with the incorrect application of the rules of substantive law, so that a constitutional control is required in order to ensure for the recipients of the Law No 55/2020 the reasonable possibility to be able to predict the scope and effects of this normative act. -
Following the entry into force of the new Romanian Civil Code (on October 1, 2011) and the new Romanian Code of Civil Procedure (which will take place on February 1, 2013), in the Romanian civil law doctrine a controversy arose in the sense that divorce exclusive fault of the defendant State (that if the respondent spouse doesn’t file a counterclaim) is admissible only by way of exception, where the reason for divorce consists of a minimum 2-year de facto separation of spouses or, on the contrary in other situations as well. After a thorough analysis, the author opts for restrictive solution, i.e. divorce for applicant spouse’s exclusive fault (if the respondent spouse doesn’t file a counterclaim) is admissible only by way of exception, where the reason for divorce consists of a minimum 2-year de facto separation of spouses. -
In this study the authors make an approach that highlights the lack of harmonization between organic laws and the post-December period constitutional laws, in relation to regulating the free use right with referring to the public property, primarily, and the private property of the state/territorial-administrative units, in subsidiary; then the legislating of the new Civil Code which fully ceases the unconstitutionality status; and finally several aspects of specific administrative technique are being addressed. -
Although the administrator of the association of owners or tenants can also commit the offense of embezzlement by the acquisition of surpluses created in his/her management by fraudulent means, he/she can be sued only for embezzlement and not for having committed the offense of creating surpluses in management as well. This study analyses whether the administrator has the capacity of manager according to the provisions of art. 1, parag. (1) of Law no. 22/1969 and presents the reasons why the administrator cannot be an active subject of the offense of creating surpluses in management by fraudulent means, although he/she is an employee, due to the fact that he/she is employed with an individual employment contract and has as main work tasks the management of the property and values of the association of owners or tenants.
