-
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? -
The immunity which the President of Romania enjoys is a „constitutional guarantee, a measure of legal protection of the mandate that is meant to ensure the independence of the mandate holder from any external pressures or abuses. The guarantee provided by Article 72 (1) of the Constitution encourages the mandate holder to adopt an active role in the political life of the society, as it removes his legal liability for the political opinions expressed in exercising the function of public dignity. However, the holder of the mandate remains liable, according to the law, for all acts and deeds committed during the period in which he exercised the public office and which were not related to the votes or political opinions”. The quoted text is an excerpt from the grounds retained by the Constitutional Court in the motivation of its Decision No 284 of 21 May 2014, by which the constitutional contentious court has solved the legal conflict of a constitutional nature between the President of the Republic and the Government of Romania. The whole scaffolding of the arguments of the Constitutional Court leads to the „construction” of an active role of the President in the political and social life of the country as if it were limited to the free expression of some political opinions under the protection of parliamentary immunity. However, it should be noted that the Fundamental Law does not recognize through an express text „the active role of the President of Romania in the political life”. This is why we have reservations about the fairness of the quoted decision. First, the term of political life used in the decision of the Constitutional Court is far too general and thus it has a large margin of inaccuracy. After all, any public authority regulated in Title III of the Constitution must have an active role in the political life. When the Constitution refers in Article 80 to the Role of the President it takes into account the prerogatives of this public institution in the process of exercising public powers, a term equivalent to the governing activity, or the exercise of these prerogatives does not imply an activation of the constitutional role of the President of Romania, but its accomplishment within the limits outlined by the constitutional texts . Beyond this is the abusive exercise of the governing acts by the holder of the mandate of President of Romania, for which he, not benefiting from immunity, is required to be liable according to the Constitution.
-
According to the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter GDPR), in each Member State of the European Union, one or more independent supervisory authorities of personal data processing must operate under conditions of full independence. Therefore, by this article we aim to achieve two main objectives. A first objective is to explain the notion of „full independence” and the second objective is to find and analyze some of the essential elements for guaranteeing full independence. The methodology used has focused on the study of the European and national legislation (the European treaties, the GDPR, the Romanian Constitution, the Administrative Code), on the study of doctrine and on the analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter CJEU) on the issue of full independence of the supervisory authorities. This paper concludes that the notion of the independence of the supervisory authorities is a fragile notion that requires the full attention of the Member States. The fundamental human rights and freedoms must survive any political movements or commercial interests. The Member States, by the national law, must ensure adequate safeguards to ensure full independence of the supervisory authorities and must establish effective rules on the sanctioning of those who infringe on their independent status. As the notion of independence is a fragile notion, in the future, the Member States’ actions to safeguard the independence of the supervisory authorities must increase in direct proportion to the degree of risk of the new technologies to privacy and to the other fundamental rights and freedoms. Regarding the structure of the paper, in the Introduction, we discussed the necessity of existence of some national data protection authorities. In Section II, we briefly presented certain general considerations about supervisory authorities. In Section III, we set out certain general considerations about the legal regime of the autonomous administrative authorities in Romania. In Section IV.A we analyzed and defined the notion of „full independence”, and in Section IV.B we extracted from the legislation, doctrine and case law a part of the essential elements for guaranteeing a full independence and we briefly explained these elements.
-
The current Civil Procedure Code clarifies some doctrinal controversies and controversies of the arbitral case law and transposes on legislative level some solutions of the arbitral practice, meant to make the arbitral jurisdiction more efficient. Among these aspects of making it more efficient, the study mentions those related to the extension of the competence of arbitration and the autonomy of will of the parties in organizing and conducting the arbitral procedure, likely to increase the access to this private jurisdiction, as an alternative to the state jurisdiction. Another dimension of the current regulation is related to the ways of materializing the arbitral convention and of the presumption of arbitrariness of the disputes regarding all misunderstandings arising from the contract or from the legal relations to which the agreement refers. The current regulation is concerned with the quality of the jurisdictional act which it connects to the qualification of the members of the arbitration tribunal, to their impartiality, by extending the causes of incompatibility as compared to those of judges and by guaranteeing the right to defence, by representing or assisting the parties by a lawyer. The autonomy of will, which impregnates the arbitral procedure, is associated with the principles of the civil trial, extended by the current regulation to the arbitral procedure, in order to increase the procedural guarantees offered by this private jurisdiction. An innovative solution is related to the participation of third parties in the arbitral procedure, under the terms of maintaining the composition of the arbitral tribunal, in order to ensure the complete and global settlement of the dispute. Another novelty of the current regulation is related to the material competence of the courts of appeal in resolving the action for annulment and the solutions that can be pronounced in case of admitting the action for annulment. Last but not least, the regulation makes the distinction between the procedure of the institutionalized and ad-hoc arbitration, in the context of the autonomy of will of the parties.
-
The article presents the considerations of the Decision No 250/2019 of the Constitutional Court of Romania and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the change of the legal framework during the trial, concluding that it is ordered by a conclusion prior to the settlement on the merits. Likewise, there are presented arguments that justify the mandatory preparation of the minute in case of change of legal framework, the motivation of the conclusion and its communication. There are examined, from the perspective of the change of the legal framework, the amendments and supplements to the Criminal Procedure Code ordered by the Law No 130/2021, which bring specifications in agreement to the case law of the Constitutional Court of Romania and of the European Court of Human Rights.
-
This article reviews the regulatory framework on investigations into marine navigation in Romania, indicating the timeline of the criminalization patterns followed by the presentation of the common aspects of the structure and constitutive content of the investigations by analyzing in three specific chapters provided in the normative basis of the Law No 191/2003 on the legal regime that applies to maritime transports and studies of the distinctive elements of each investigation, and finally by drawing critical conclusions and implications related to lex ferenda.
-
There are situations in which the judicial bodies need the opinion of an expert to ascertain, clarify or evaluate certain facts or circumstances that are important for finding out the truth. Forensic expertises have a special regime in relation to other types of expertises, which can be performed only in sanitary institutions of forensic medicine, subordinated to the Ministry of Health. The supreme scientific authority in the field of forensic medicine is the Superior Forensic Commission, which operates under the Institute of Forensic Medicine „Mina Minovici” Bucharest. This article aims to clarify the probative value, in a criminal trial, of the advisory opinions issued by this supreme authority, because there have been and are situations, in the judicial practice, in which there has been given superior probative value to this advisory opinion, as well as situations in which its conclusions were removed with reasons.
-
The problems of the land fund became of maximum importance after 1990. Romania, in relation to the new realities regarding the property, had to urgently adopt the Law No 18/1991. After more than 30 years of application, the Law on the land fund still gives rise to discussions on the topic of sharing the competence of the courts in matters of administrative acts issued in its application. The general framework in the matter of restitutions was completed by the appearance of the Law No 10/2001. Subsequently, the entry into force of the Law No 554/2004 has definitively established the legal regime of administrative acts in general. Therefore, we are at the confluence of several framework-laws in the field regarding the regime of administrative disputes, in general, and of the matter of the land fund, in particular. This study seeks to provide precisely an approach as analytical as possible of the manner the courts of law settle this issue.
-
The behaviour of a free and conscious man is the result of his will, which is guided by a reasonable intentionality that gives it meaning. In the absence of a purpose, any action becomes chaotic, accidental and raises questions about the mental health of the person who takes action 1 . We find that the fourth essential condition, a substantive one, necessary for the valid existence of the sales contract is the cause. According to the rules of common law, in matters of legal acts, the cause is the determining reason for the consent expr essed when concluding the legal act. The obligation without cause or with an illicit or false cause cannot have any effect.
-
The abuse of petitions committed by the natural persons is the most common form of abuse of law as the elements necessary to qualify a right as being abusively exercised, namely the subjective element (bad faith) and the objective element (diversion of the right from the purpose, economic and social finality or overcoming the internal limits of the law) presuppose a conduct of the holder of the right related to his mental ability to understand the meaning of the deed, to discern between what is good or bad, legal and illegal. This study analyzes the forms of abuse of right committed by persons deprived of liberty both at the level of courts of law and at the level of the offices of supervisory judges, as well as the psychic attitude of the subject towards the possibility of realizing the right in contradiction with its destination and purpose, and towards the consequences that may represent damages to the person, society or state. Even if the persons deprived of liberty constitute a vulnerable category of persons, the recognition of the right of access to justice, to petition, as well as of the possibility to use them at any time, as an application of the constitutional principle of equality of all persons before the law, does not confer them also the right to exercise them excessively, in a word, to abuse of them.
-
Guilt is that psychic attitude of the active subject, who – voluntarily committing an act provided by the criminal law, anti-juridical and imputable – is aware of the objective circumstances in which he externalizes his conduct or, although he does not have this conscience, should and could have it. Guilt is separate from the foresight of the criminal law and covers the subjective elements of the content of the crime. The structure of guilt includes two psychic processes, which are called factors thereof. The first is conscience or the intellective factor, and the second is the will or the volitional factor. The conscience deliberates on the deed and decides whether it will be committed. The will mobilizes the energy necessary for the implementation of the decision taken. The forms and modalities of guilt are defined by relating the conscience and the will to the objective circumstances. Intellectively, what relates to objective circumstances is the presence or absence of conscience. Volitionally, what relates to objective circumstances is the content of the will. Conscience can be present and objective circumstances can be represented correctly, when there is intent, direct or indirect. Conscience may be present, but objective circumstances may be misrepresented when there is premeditated guilt. Conscience may be absent when – in the presence of the obligation and of the possibility of predicting objective circumstances – there is guilt without foresight. Direct intent, indirect intent, and premeditated guilt are defined by the foresight of the objective circumstances. The direct intent is defined by pursuing the result, the indirect intent is defined by accepting the result, and the guilt with foresight is defined by rejecting the result. Guilt without foresight is defined by the failure to foresee the objective circumstances and by the obligation and the possibility to foresee them. The classification of the intent in direct and indirect is made according to the way of reporting the will to the result of the crime. The intent is direct, if the active subject pursues the result of the crime. According to the way in which the active subject prefigures the result of the crime, the direct intent has two degrees of intensity. Each degree in its turn has two stages. The active subject prefigures the result of the crime as an end in itself (the first stage of the first degree), as a necessary means to achieve another goal (the second stage of the first degree) or as an inevitable consequence (the first stage of the second degree) or very probable (the second stage of the second degree) of the manner in which the commission of the crime is conceived. The intent is indirect, if the active subject accepts the result of the crime. In case of indirect intent, two results are discussed. Indifference to the second result (which is illegal, provided by criminal law) is the essence of indirect intent. The classification of the intent into simple and qualified is made according to the existence of a special purpose or motive, expressly provided in the incrimination norm. The intent is simple, if the active subject commits the crime without pursuing a certain purpose and without being pushed by a certain motive, expressly provided in the incrimination norm. The intent is qualified, if the active subject commits the crime pursuing a certain purpose or being pushed by a certain motive, expressly provided in the incrimination norm. The qualified intent is direct when the characteristics of qualified intent and those of direct intent intertwine. The qualified intent can also be indirect, when the characteristics of the qualified intent dissociate from the characteristics of the direct intent. The qualified intent is direct, if: a certain circumstance is foreseen in the content of the crime both as a result and as a purpose or as a motive; a certain circumstance is provided in the content of the crime as a result and is prefigured by the active subject as a necessary means to achieve the special purpose or to satisfy the special motive or as an inevitable or very probable consequence of achieving the special purpose or satisfying the special motive. The qualified intent may also be indirect, if a certain circumstance is provided in the content of the crime as a result and another circumstance, different from the first, is provided as a special purpose or as a special motive and the result is not prefigured by the active subject neither for the achieving of the special purpose or for the satisfaction of the special motive, nor as an inevitable or very probable consequence of the achievement of the special purpose or of the satisfaction of the special motive. The classification of the intent into premeditated and spontaneous is made according to the mental state that the active subject has at the moment of making the decision to commit the crime, as well as the length of time between the time of making this decision and the time of its execution. The intent is premeditated, if the active subject decides to commit the crime in a state of calm and if from the moment of making the decision to commit the crime until the moment of its execution a longer time interval passes. There are two theories regarding premeditation: one objective and the other one subjective. In the objective theory it is considered that premeditation requires preparatory acts, that it is compatible with the provocation and that it is a personal circumstance, which is objectified in the content of the crime and produces the effects of a real circumstance. In the subjective theory, to which I adhere, premeditation does not require preparatory acts, is incompatible with the provocation and is a personal circumstance, which does not affect the participants. The intent is spontaneous, if the active subject decides to commit the crime in a state of over-excitement and if from the moment of making the decision to commit the crime until the moment of its execution, passes a time interval as short as possible. The intent is pure and simple, if it does not meet either the conditions of the premeditated intent, or the conditions of the spontaneous intent. The classifications of the intent highlight certain levels of danger of the active subject, which are investigated on the occasion of the individualization of the punishment. The different stages of danger of the active subject, detached from the different degrees and stages of intensity of the direct intent, impose different solutions with reference to the judicial individualization of the punishment. The danger stage of the active subject related to the indirect intent is lower than the one related to the direct intent. Qualified intent imprints a degree of danger, as a rule, greater or, exceptionally, lower of the active subject. The special purpose or motive enters into the content of the crime as a constitutive element or as an aggravating circumstantial element, as a rule, or as an attenuating circumstantial element, by exception. The premeditated intent is capitalized as an aggravating circumstantial element (in the content of the qualified murder), a general legal aggravating circumstance (pre-ordered intoxication) or an aggravating criterion of judicial individualization of the punishment. Spontaneous intent is capitalized as a legal, general (provocative) or special (killing or injuring the newborn by the mother) mitigating circumstance. Pure and simple intent is neutral from the point of view of judicial individualization.
-
Contractul de ipotecă poate fi desființat, sub forma anulării, numai în condițiile art. 1648 alin. (1) C.civ. în ceea ce privește soluționarea cererii de anulare a contractului de ipotecă, exclusiv ca o consecință a rezoluțiunii contractului de vânzare prin care pârâta a dobândit dreptul de proprietate asupra terenului, cu privire la care a constituit ulterior un drept real, reprezentat de dreptul de ipotecă în favoarea pârâtei. Aceste dispoziții fac trimitere însă la regulile de carte funciară, urmând, așadar, ca, în continuare, să fie observate dispozițiile art. 908 C.civ., ce reglementează ipotezele în care se poate dispune rectificarea cărții funciare.
