This article proposes to examine certain aspects related to the incompatibility of the criminal investigation bodies and of the prosecutor within the criminal lawsuit. The authors take into consideration mainly the incidence of incompatibility cases in the stage of preliminary acts, emphasizing the case of incompatibility set forth in art.48 paragraph (1) letter d) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Through their scientific undertaking, the authors try to demonstrate that incompatibility concerns, to the same extent, both the stage of criminal prosecution, and the stage of preliminary acts. Likewise, the scope of the above mentioned incompatibility case and the decision related to its prosecution are examined from the perspective of the provisions of the (European) Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as in the light of the provisions of the new Criminal Procedure Code.

According to the opinion of the author of this study, the periodical verification, during the trial, upon the receipt of the criminal file, but also at time intervals of maximum 60 days, of the legality and validity of the measure of preventive arrest of the defendant, shall be carried out by the court, no matter whether the warrant of preventive arrest was executed or not. Failure to perform this obligation during the trial, even for the non-confined defendant, shall lead to the rightful termination of the preventive arrest.

This study examined in a comparative manner the provisions of the Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 compared to the Romanian internal provisions related to taking into consideration the criminal convictions decided in another European Union Member State, in the circumstances in which in another Member State a new criminal lawsuit is being initiated against the same individual, but for different facts. The investigation is important since the above mentioned European normative act is classified in the broad range of measures taken for the purpose of the harmonization of laws in the field of judicial cooperation in the criminal matter within the Member States, and the Romanian laws have not been adjusted yet to the European legislative system. Based upon the investigation carried out by the authoress, it results that both the examined European normative act and the internal laws in the matter have certain lacks and for this reason their amendment and supplement is required. The essential contribution of the study shall consist in the examination of certain judicial rules and the identification of certain situations which have to be regulated either by supplementing the European normative act, or by the adoption of another instrument, the same situation being valid as regards the Romanian laws, as well.

Prevention and fight against cross-border offences specific to organized crime shall be a major aim assumed by the European Union, an aim which has become imperative in time because of the proliferation of criminality in the matter and implicitly of the high degree of social danger of these categories of criminal offences. The study exposes a comparative analysis of the European Framework normative act, as compared to the provisions contained in the national internal laws, the author revealing that the Romanian criminal law is present interest, and in these circumstances the Romanian legislator shall not operate any amendments for the transposition of this normative act in the Romanian law. Beforehand, this subject represented the subject matter of certain different investigations in the field of judicial cooperation in the criminal matter among the Member States, concretized in studies and items published in specialty journals or international conferences, where the need for the harmonization of laws was pointed out among the Member States. Likewise, this study exposes also certain critical remarks related to certain rules contained in the European normative act, which, according to the author’s opinion, should be supplemented. Finally, this study is distinguished both by the comparative examination of the Council Framework Decision 2008/841/ JHA of 24 October 2008, with the provisions of the national internal law, and by the critical formulated remarks.

This study analyzes a series of correlations between the current Civil Code (entered into force on October 1, 2011) and the legislation relating to intellectual creation (works, related creations thereof, databases, inventions, industrial drawings or models, trademarks and geographical indications). In this respect, following a series of considerations concerning the legal terminology in this field, the paper discusses the patrimonial intellectual property rights on the works and trademarks that each of the spouses registered, as well as on scientific or literary manuscripts, drawings, art and invention projects and other similar property, as well as on the revenues due under an intellectual property right. Finally, it draws some considerations related to private international law matters on the legal protection of intellectual creation.

Brokerage is an activity which plays an important role in the economy and is exercised in various areas thereof, such as trade, insurance, transport, etc. Despite the importance of this activity and the large number of brokered legal relationships, the first brokerage contract regulation is found in the Civil Code (Law no. 287/2009) which entered into force on October 1, 2011. The brokers are professionals and their goal is to bring together other natural or legal persons to conclude certain contracts specific to the economic sector they operate in. Brokers are third parties to the agreement between the two parties brought into relationship and have only the right to receive the established remuneration as far as the brokered agreement is concluded. In terms of the right to remuneration, the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken by the parties in the brokered contract is irrelevant.

The author carries out a detailed analysis of the legal content of the insurance fraud offense, as provided for in Art.245 of the new Criminal Code as an assimilated and aggravated version of the deception offense. Regarding the structure of this offense, the criminal protection object, the subjects, the objective and subjective side, the forms, procedures and sanctions provided by law are reviewed in detail. The explanations discuss the insurance deception links to other offences relating to insurance and certain procedural aspects. The preceding legislation of this indictment rule, the solutions to be followed in case of transitional situations and some elements of comparative law are subsequently presented. Also, the author does not hesitate to state his point of view with regard to the constituent content of this criminal act, its systematization, its character and to frame in this regard certain solutions and certain ideas of his own. In the end, this analysis gives several conclusions and proposals of future law to determine an appropriate protection of the values „and social relationships covered by this indictment, a uniform implementation of the text and thus a better criminal justice administration in Romania.

The author examines the concept of „seniority in magistracy according to the applicable laws (Law no.303/2004 regarding the statute of judges and prosecutors) by referring to the broader concepts of seniority at work, respectively, seniority in a specialty.

Analyzing the jurisprudence of the past three decades whereas tort law is concerned, one can easily find some gray areas, where the doctrinal principles developed so far seem to have fallen behind the realities of our modern society. Such a gray area is being analyzed by the author of this study, and it is attributed by modern doctrine to the jurisprudence applying the precautionary principle. Developed in the area of international public law, adapted to private law, and embraced by modern doctrine, the precautionary principle is a prominent figure in European legislation, as well as in our national laws, and lately also in court decisions.

Administrative jurisdiction on public procurement is carried out by the National Council for Solving Complaints and finalized with the pronouncement of certain administrative and judicial acts, called decisions. These can be attacked by complaint to the courts of appeal, whose decisions are final. The 2010 amendment to the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 34/2006 on awarding public procurement contracts, public works and services concession contracts introduced the obligation of those who make complaints to pay legal fee in an amount which even now raises some questions. Alpha The practice of all courts of appeal in the country is to accept to charge the complaints with either 4 lei or 2 lei. Constanþa Court of Appeal chose to break away from this unwavering practice of the courts of appeal which it itself promoted until recently and to require claimants to pay a value charge according to the amounts provided for in Art. 28717 paragraph 1 of the Ordinance, namely between 0,01 lei and 1,100 lei, and not fixed amounts of 4 and 2 lei. This study enounces the two different solutions found in courts of appeal case law and the arguments that they are based on, whilst the author tries to generate thoughts on the issue of charging the complaints not only to those involved in the judicial process of settlement of the latter and the litigants, but also to the legislative body, with an eye to prompt and definitive clarification thereof.

In this study the author analyzes the requirements for the admissibility of provisional release under judicial control and provisional release on bail from the point of view of the Code of Criminal Procedure in force and the new Code of Criminal Procedure, the internal doctrine and the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Supreme Court’s case law and practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The general conditions for ordering judicial control and judicial control on bail are also presented - preventive measures stipulated in the new Code of Criminal Procedure, which no longer provides for the institution of provisional release.

In this study, the author examines the possibility of enforcing precautionary measures on the assets of third parties for the offense of money laundering; the analysis is carried out from the point of view of the doctrine, comparative law and the case law of the courts and the European Court of Human Rights. Alpha Having regard to the specificity of this offense and the special provisions in the field, the author considers that the goods of third parties, persons not subject to criminal prosecution or trial, must be frozen for special forfeiture.