By reference to the real guarantees, which, theoretically, ensure a greater security of the execution, the fidejussion prevails by a lower degree of formalism and by a much higher degree of flexibility. Through the fidejussion mechanism, the creditor will have as common guarantee at least two patrimonies: first of all, of course, the patrimony of the main debtor, but in addition to this patrimony it can also be satisfied from the patrimony of the fidejussor or fidejussors. No one can become a fidejussor-guarantor against his will. Regardless of its nature, the fidejussion has a contractual nature, being able to arise only through the agreement between the creditor and the fidejussor. The law or the judgment only requires to bring a personal guarantee. When a person is obliged, by law or by convention, to provide bail, and he does not voluntarily fulfil his obligation, the judgment of conviction does not convert the bail into a judicial one, it still remains legal or conventional, as the case may be. The judge only orders the execution of the legal provision or of the convention. Exceptionally, in certain situations, the law absolutely presumes the quality of a certain person as fidejussor. For example, there is a fidejussion, called an assimilated fidejussion, also in case a party undertakes to another party to grant a loan to a third party, in which case the creditor (the person to whom the commitment has been made) is guarantor (fidejussor) of the obligation to repay the loan received by the third party.

European democratic societies have shown, in recent years, an increased interest in reforming justice, the aim being to make more efficient the process of administration thereof. Likewise the efficiency of justice is a complex and continuous process which involves, among other things, guaranteeing the quality of the judicial decision and resolving the cases within a reasonable time. Within the present approach the author made a radiography of the most important reforms initiated and partially carried out in France, Italy and Spain. The investigation carried out has led to the conclusion of the existence of some common regulatory trends, but also to the existence of some different solutions. Common trends have been identified in terms of judicial organization, distinguishing itself a process of concentration of jurisdictions and of specialization thereof. The most significant example from this point of view is that of France, a country where a recent reform has led to the merger of the courts with the high courts. The courts resulting from this concentration are called judicial courts. In Spain, the justice reforms were initiated in 2001 following the conclusion of a „State Agreement” between the Government, the People’s Party and the Socialist Party. In Italy in recent years it was undertaken a reform which led to the increase in the competence of justices of the peace. In all the mentioned states there was also a marked tendency towards making more efficient the alternative ways of resolving the conflicts. Different procedural and judicial options were found regarding the composition of the superior councils of the magistracy, the organization of judicial inspections and the organization of the Public Ministry. Such options take into account the particularities of each judicial system, which excludes a total uniformity and are part of the democratic processes aimed at consolidating the state of law.

Termenul de prescripție a dreptului la acțiune în rezoluțiunea promisiunii de vânzare-cumpărare începe a curge doar de la momentul în care partea interesată a dobândit certitudinea că pârâtul se află în imposibilitate de a-și executa principala obligație asumată.

În practica judiciară nonpenală din România, cel mai invocat drept prevăzut de Convenția (europeană) pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale a fost, este și, cel mai probabil, va rămâne dreptul la un proces echitabil, prevăzut de art. 6. Acest lucru se datorează faptului că instanțele judecătorești trebuie să soluționeze un număr impresionant de litigii (în condițiile unor scheme de personal subdimensionate), mult peste media sistemelor judiciare din vestul Europei.

According to the legal provisions in force, public institutions and authorities (ministries and other specialized bodies of the central public administration) are obliged by the law to ensure their effective security and protection. Also, the security of the objectives of special importance for the defence of the country and for the activity of the state is provided by gendarmes, which have military status. Although the presence of military personnel in public institutions and public authorities is a requirement imposed by the law in order to protect the premises of the institutions, the measures taken by the authorities for managing the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic determined, inter alia, a substantial involvement, superior to the one existing in normal conditions, of the military personnel. More specifically, they were part in the actions of the public order bodies of vigilance regarding the observance of the restrictions of movement imposed on the occasion of the establishment of the state of emergency and subsequently the state of alert, as well as in the protection of the public authorities. This aspect translates into a significant increase of the numerical presence of military personnel in everyday life. Without being exhaustive, this study aims to analyze the jurisprudence of military courts on how the provisions on the offence of violation of guard and security duty were interpreted and applied, an analysis which revealed some problematic issues in terms of predictability and accessibility of legal provisions.

The new Criminal Code has substantially modified the modalities of judicial individualization of punishments applied to defendants, also bringing novelty elements regarding the calculation of the fine, the possibility of its cumulative application with the sentence of imprisonment, when the offence committed was intended to obtain a patrimonial benefit, or the possibility of replacing it with community service work. By this study, I intend, through a careful analysis of both the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the doctrine, regarding Article 7 of the Convention, as well as of the principle of legality in general, to argue the impossibility of the judge to order the revocation of the suspension under supervision of the sentence in case that a penalty with the fine, applied to the same person, was replaced by the sentence of imprisonment.