The normative act which regulates the Romanian citizenship is the Law No 21/1991, republished on 13 August 2010. Recently (on 15 September 2015), the Law on the Romanian citizenship No 21/1991, republished, has undergone important amendments and supplements brought by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 37/2015, an ordinance whose content is the subject of this study.

By critically analyzing the foundation of the civil contract, in light of the provisions of the current Romanian Civil Code, in relation to the modern Western European legal doctrine, and by insisting on some obsolete and/or contradictory legal regulations of the new Romanian Civil Code, the author of this study, on the one hand, considers that the principle pacta sunt servanda has presently become a myth, that we are witnessing the constant decline of the autonomy of will in matters of civil contracts and, at the same time, a series of new developments as regards the limits of the contractual freedom, the legal regulation of unpredictability in the new Romanian Civil Code (Article 1271) being relevant in this respect. Finally, the author believes that the current Romanian Civil Code (of 2009) contains a number of inconsistencies and contradictory regulations under the mentioned aspects, for which reason he proposes, in conclusion, the recast of the Code as soon as possible, taking into account the numerous failures thereof.

In the context of the new legal framework existing after the entry into force of the Law No 85/2014, this study analyzes the final table of claims and the contestations against it, by emphasizing the notable differences as compared to the old regulation – the Law No 85/2006 – and the importance of the final table of claims over the debtor’s estate in the insolvency procedure, as well as the exceptional character of the contestations against it. The registration of claims in the final table of claims against the debtor’s estate is generating rights for the creditors, and, consequently, the analysis and the thorough study of how this is produced, of the content of the final table of claims, of the time of its registration and publication, as well as of the rights and obligations of the participants in this procedure are essential. The contestations against the final table of claims have an exceptional character and the conditions in which these may be formulated are strictly, expressly and limitatively enumerated by the law. Under these circumstances, this legal remedy is approached from the perspective of the persons who may have the legal standing to file the contestation, from the perspective of the time limit for their submission – which appears as a highly opportune legislative novelty for the stability of the procedure – and, finally, from the perspective of the exceptional situations which may lead to the admission of such contestation.

With the entry into force of the current Criminal Code, the Romanian legislator has eliminated the mixed regime of sanctions made of punishments and educational measures, provided by the old criminal regulation, in favour of a regime of sanctions exclusively consisting in educational measures. By this study, the author subjects the provisions specific to the educational measures involving deprivation of liberty regulated by Chapter III of Title V of the Criminal Code to a thorough analysis.

This paper deals with the problems of establishing the garnishment when the debtor is the Romanian State itself. The analysis is carried out in the light of the provisions of Article 5 (1) of the Government Emergency Ordinance No 146/2002, republished. At the same time, it is also analyzed the lack of incidence of the provisions of the Government Ordinance No 22/2002 in case of this debtor.

This study examines the problem of running of the period of extinctive prescription of the right to claim damages before the civil court, subsequently to the situation in which the prosecutor has issued an ordinance to dismiss, under the Criminal Procedure Code.