Loading...
  • Potrivit art. 598 alin. (1) lit. c) C.pr.pen., contestația împotriva executării hotărârii penale se poate face când se ivește vreo nelămurire cu privire la hotărârea care se execută sau vreo împiedicare la executare
  • The perception and consideration of global warming and of its consequences as an „existential crisis” and the official proclamation – at the level of more and more states, of EU and within UNO – of the climate emergency confer the character of major priority of the entire humanity to the concerns aimed at mitigating the phenomenon, at limiting and adapting to its effects. The control of the anthropic impact on the climate system and the effort to maintain its stability have involved the intervention of law in various forms and different measures – public policies, constitutional provisions, pertinent legislative provisions and relevant international treaties –, with legal force of soft law or of firm normativity, within a world-wide governance, particularized regionally and nationally. An increasingly significant aspect of this process becomes the consideration of the impact of climate change on human rights and the relevant legal reaction of development of some appropriate meanings, with structuring trends in the form of a new dimension, specific to the right to a protected, healthy and ecologically balanced environment, the right to a stable climate and proper to the maintaining of the planetary ecological balance, to preserving the condition of the human species and favourable to the perpetuation of the civilization created by it. Initiated by the doctrine, the idea was acquired and knows the first resonances in the case law, with more and more firm and adequate echoes at regulatory level, finding ourselves at the moment of identifying and promoting the appropriate solutions and the adequate ways to achieve that goal. The new fundamental (human) right, individual and collective, of the present generations and especially of the future generations, protecting their possibility to adapt to the pace and amplitude of climate change, is foreshadowed as an indestructible component of the system of environmental rights, asserted in the last half century, quasi-universally recognized – constitutionally, legislatively and internationally – and who know their own dynamics.
  • The labour law – a branch and science of the Romanian law system – has come a long way to the present days, when it fully manifests its specificity and autonomy that characterizes it. The doctrine evokes a „labour contract” concluded according to rules of the Roman law. In the Middle Ages, the Romanian principalities did not know regulations regarding legal labour relations. It was only in the Civil Code of 1864 that there were established specific regulations of some civil contracts which included some elements of some labour relations. The appearance and development of the industry determined, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the adoption of some legal norms aimed at the protection of workers. The labour legislation was invigorated due to the rules of the International Labour Organization, established in 1919. Our country, as a founding member, has ratified the essential conventions of this organization in the interwar period, but also later, to the present days. About a labour law, distinct, autonomous in Romania, one can speak only after the entry into force of the Labour Code of 1950. The development of the Romanian society, its economic and social level have also determined the evolution of the labour legislation and of the labour law, as it will be shown in the elaborated study.
  • The study analyzes the two procedural moments of judging the requests for revision, traditional in our law – the admissibility in principle and the retrial –, by referring, mainly, to the new amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code and to the jurisprudential solutions. There are taken into account the measures that can be taken at the same time with or after the admission in principle and the solutions that will be given in the retrial of the case. Whereas a substantial change in the matter of revision, following the entry into force of the new Criminal Procedure Code, concerns the exclusive revision of the civil side of the criminal trial, respectively the division of the material competence between the criminal court and the civil court, a section is devoted to this issue. Whereas the new provisions are quite elliptical in this matter, the paper tries to identify aspects that may raise problems of application and to suggest solutions.
  • Infracțiunea prevăzută de art. 337 C.pen. are ca situație premisă solicitarea expresă din partea organelor de poliție rutieră adresată conducătorului auto de a se supune prelevării de mostre biologice, în ambele modalități normative, atât în cazul refuzului, cât și în cazul sustragerii conducătorului unui vehicul de a se supune prelevării de mostre biologice necesare în vederea stabilirii alcoolemiei.
  • La data de 1 martie 2020, Parchetul de pe lângă Judecătoria X a solicitat a se dispune înlocuirea măsurii preventive a controlului judiciar cu măsura arestării preventive față de inculpat, ca urmare a incidenței în cauză a dispozițiilor art. 215 alin. (7) C.pr.pen
  • The article, a continuation of the study with the same title published in the previous issue of „Dreptul” magazine, presents in detail the minority point of view expressed within the civil procedure collective of the Faculty of Law of the West University from Timișoara, according to which the object of the incidental or provoked appeal/review may be the grounds or the solutions contained in the judgment of the court and in the preliminary conclusions, whether they have been challenged or not by means of the main appeal/review
  • Reflections on the moral and legal status of the animal, its cognitive abilities, its differences, essential or not, with humans, have nourished human thinking since ancient times; source of debate also today are a lot of questions: can we kill animals, we can eat them, we can use them in our activity, both in the field and in laboratories, do animals have rights, are they subjects of law? Ever since Roman law, the animal was considered from legal point of view, considering only the faculty of man’s appropriation as a subject of law; the main status of animal remains that of reification, their interests being most often ignored for the benefit of humans’ interests. This status embraced by doctrine, praised legally throughout the different civilizations and which has lasted until today, could be maintained by virtue of the „natural” power of human domination exercised over the rest of living beings also through the Cartesian animal–machine theory, which was translated into law by the animal–thing theory.
  • Legal separation („separația de corp”) is a quasi-divorce, which does not lead to the dissolution of the marriage, but produces certain legal consequences on personal and patrimonial relations between spouses. Based on religious motivations, legal separation is the compromising solution adopted in states of Catholic religion, in which marriage is seen as an indissoluble and perpetual bond. Although known in several Member States of the European Union (EU), legal separation has meanings, conditions, procedure and effects that differ from one state to another. In Romanian law, the institution of legal separation is not regulated. The Orthodox religion, predominant in Romania, rejects the dogma of the indissolubility of marriage and allows divorce. However, in the Civil Code, among the provisions of private international law there is a rule indicating the law applicable to legal separation. The use of the notion, which is otherwise singular, is not accompanied by a definition or explanation of the term. In the European regulations (the Regulation Brussels II bis on jurisdiction1 and the Regulation Rome III on the applicable law2 ), directly applicable in Romania, two similar notions are used, those of „separare de drept” (legal separation) and of „separare de corp” (separation of body).
  • Potrivit prevederilor art. 1345 C.civ., „cel care, în mod neimputabil, s-a îmbogățit fără justă cauză în detrimentul altuia este obligat la restituire, în măsura pierderii patrimoniale suferite de cealaltă persoană, dar fără a fi ținut dincolo de limita propriei sale îmbogățiri”
  • The official proclamation of the climate emergency (at an international, European, and national level) has stimulated the concerns and efforts to regulate and adopt public policies aiming for mitigation of, and adaptation to climate change. Initiated in the name of the principle of precaution – scientific uncertainty regarding the anthropic causes do not justify the inconsideration of the phenomenon, but they impose taking progressive and proportional measures – 30 years ago, the process of development of climate law has already known three successive and progressive stages, configured around three major international acts. The Framework Convention on climate change (1992) has generated a general normativity, as a guideline and non-binding; the additional Kyoto Protocol (1997), with a superior legal force, provided precise targets and determinate periods of time to reach them; finally, the Paris Agreement (2015) has marked the phase of voluntary commitments and of adequate instruments, varied in their means of enforcing. Characterized by a dependency and a major interconnection with scientific data, climate law is inspired by a series of fundamental concepts (general interest of humanity, environmental transition, the rights of future generations, global approach), and it is dominated by a series of general principles (precaution, common but differentiated responsibility, the right to a stable climate), affirming itself as a law of the present day, but especially of the future. Assuming the Green Deal as a new strategy for growth of the EU (2019), of the law for climate (2020) and the return of the USA to the Paris Agreement (2021) re-launch the multi-lateral framework for negotiation and international regulation in this field, opening ample perspective for affirmation of the new legal regime and the innovative scientific field.
  • Resulting from the frontal collision of two criminal law systems at the level of the legislation, theory and practice of criminal law, the crisis of the (science of) criminal law in Romania is a crisis of the „technical-legal method”. This crisis resulted from the lack of thoroughly analysing the foundations of this method configured in terms of general juridical theory in the context of the Historical School of Law from Germany, received in the particular matter of the theory of criminal law thanks to the contribution of the Italian criminal specialists (Arturo Rocco) and which became a traditional method of the Romanian science of criminal law due to its reception in Italy by Vintilă Dongoroz. In the broader plan of the general theory of law, the same crisis proves to be a crisis of the idea of science of law, explicable by the vicissitudes of the reception of the Historical School of Law in Romania over the last 150 years.
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