The courts can contribute, within their competencies, to ensure supremacy of the Constitution; this also involves the ability to directly implement some of the constitutional regulations. In the context of the complex process of human rights internationalization, certain analysis and solutions concerning the relationship between the international and domestic human rights regulations and hence interpretations of the provisions covered by the Constitution on this issue appear more frequently within the case law. In this study the author analyzes the role of national judges in applying the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms under the legitimacy which is conferred upon them by the provisions of Art. 20 of the Constitution, republished; this analysis is based on case law matters on criminal appeal, governed by Art. 141 paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The regulation by the new Civil Code of the patrimonies by appropriation came as a necessity given the economic development of our society. The existence of the patrimony by appropriation was equally recognized by the former legislation, by way of specific provisions regarding the carrying out of certain liberal professions or economic activities. This paper is aimed at analysing specific aspects of the patrimonies by appropriation from the perspective of the liberal individual professional patrimony, as a patrimonial mass distinctively regulated by the new codification. The exercise of the authorized liberal professionals implies the existence of a professional patrimony that ensures the carrying out of activities that do not have an economic character. The formal recognition of the “self-employed” as a subject of tax law bearing specific tax liabilities, distinct from those incurred by this same person concerning his personal patrimony, could create the appearance of a “two-headed monster”, of two or more persons in one, of a person who is multiplying according to the number of patrimonies by appropriation that he holds. In fact, the possibility for an individual to carry out economic activities or liberal professions without setting up, to that effect, a legal entity with its own patrimony, does not require the use of the legal fiction of multiplying the person according to the needed number of patrimonies, as the modern doctrine concering the patrimony accepts both the uniqueness and the division of the patrimony into patrimonial masses and patrimonies by appropriation.

The accession of Romania to the European Union on January 1st, 2007 also involved the need for harmonization of national legislation with the European one, which, inter alia, led to the elaboration of a new Criminal Code. This regulation covers some new elements, including the crime of harm to the unborn child, as provided for in Article 202 under the new Criminal Code, as an integral part of Title I of the Special Part dedicated to crime against the person. As stated in the Explanatory Memorandum to the new Criminal Code, by criminalizing such acts it was intended to cover a legal vacuum, i.e. to protect the fetus from the moment of the commencement of the delivery process until completion thereof. In the study hereby, the author examines from the criminal doctrine perspective, but also in terms of medical science, the meaning of the term fetus and the phrases “during childbirth” and “during pregnancy”, advancing some de lege ferenda proposals.

Taking our stand upon the differing regulations under Article 283 and Article 315 of Law No. 1/2011 on National Education (texts according to which, as far as the pre-university teaching staff is concerned, recovery of damages to the employing unit in consequence of patrimonial liability takes place based on a charging decision, while, as far as the higher education teaching staff is concerned, the recovery in question takes place according to the labour law, so, as a rule, by way of the employer’s proceedings before the Labour Court of jurisdiction), the author makes a series of critical approaches (pointing out that this distinction in the procedure is not justified) and, concurrently, puts forward de lege ferenda proposals.

In the study hereby, the author provides a critical analysis of the various positions adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court of Justice in terms of the relationship existing between the practical need of making use of hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings and the obligation incumbent upon the legal bodies to guarantee the culprit the effective exercise of the opportunity to test via counter interrogation the reliability of such evidence. The author proposed that the analysis of judicial practice to be carried out compliant with the structure followed within the specialty works in the United States, in order to distinctly put forward each category of cause in which a conflict might arise between the admissibility of hearsay evidence and compliance with the procedural guarantees established under the law in favour of the culprit and to distinctly highlight, for each category in question, solutions framed by the U.S. Supreme Court of Justice with the view to settle the conflict arisen.

The interest loan is a form of the consumption loan, having as legal grounds, mainly, the provisions of the new Civil Code, art. 2167-2170. This agreement is presumed onerous, the borrower having the obligation to pay, in due time, an amount of money or other type of goods, as interest, representing the equivalent amount of using the borrowed capital. The legal regime of the agreement, including of the generating interest, in its diversity of types, forms the object of the analysis of this study, conducted both according to the common and special provisions of the new Civil Code and in the light of the special legislation, the Government Ordinance no. 13/2011.