Loading...
  • The paper analyzes the European legislative act establishing the conditions of compensation to victims of violent crimes committed in another Member State than that of the victims residence. The research has led to the identification of some provisions which will cause some difficulties both in practice and in enunciation of scientifically critical observations. The study is useful for theorists and practitioners and also for the European legislator. The scientific contribution of this research is given by the critical remarks and future law proposals made in order to improve the complex activity to compensate the victims of all kinds of crimes, not just of violent crimes, as required by the legislative act in question.
  • În România, dreptul de proprietate privată este unul esențial, fiind prevăzut în Constituție1 în cadrul capitolului II referitor la drepturile și libertățile fundamentale. Acest act normativ reglementează dreptul de proprietate privată în mod detaliat, în cele nouă alineate ale art. 44. Pentru a reglementa acest drept, legiuitorul constituant a avut la dispoziție un vast material documentar, format în primul rând din dispozițiile vechiului Cod civil referitoare la proprietate și la regimul ei juridic, bogata doctrină acumulată între timp, precum și practica judiciară a instanțelor, toate acestea fiind adaptate la dinamica continuă a vieții sociale și a circuitului civil din societatea românească, la care se adaugă dreptul comparat în materie
  • During the state of emergency both some press articles and the official communiques of the prosecutor’s offices mentioned the criminal investigation in the case of persons who, being confirmed as infected with SARS-CoV-2, refused to be hospitalized. The present study does not aim to provide a classic analysis of the crime of thwarting disease control, but is limited to trying to find an answer to the question of whether it is possible to retain this criminal offence in the case of infected persons who refuse hospitalization. As such, this paper discusses the current Romanian legislation and concludes that, having regard to both the provisions of the Protocol for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and the systematic interpretation of the legal framework, since the Minister of Health enacted only measures to prevent and manage the emergency generated by the pandemic, as well as the obligation to diagnose the symptomatic persons, the measure of hospitalization cannot result exclusively from the unilateral will of the doctor, in reality the will of the latter playing no role, but must derive from the law in order to impose itself on both the patient and the doctor. Therefore it cannot be retained the crime of thwarting disease control in the case of infected persons who refused to be hospitalized.
  • Aspecte generale privind incriminarea faptei de abuz în serviciu. În Codul penal în vigoare infracțiunile de corupție și cele de serviciu sunt prevăzute în două capitole distincte ale titlului V din Partea specială – „Infracțiuni de corupție și de serviciu”. Ceea ce caracterizează în principal grupul infracțiunilor de serviciu sau în legătură cu serviciul este valoarea socială apărată, și anume bunul mers al activității instituțiilor și organizațiilor publice, regiilor autonome sau oricăror alte persoane juridice cu capital integral ori majoritar de stat sau declarate ca fiind de utilitate publică și, implicit, apărarea intereselor legale ale persoanelor particulare.
  • Prin arvonă (arrha)1 se înțelege ceea ce una din părțile contractante, în genere cumpărătorul (art. 1297, 1298 C. C.) sau locatarul (art. 1416), dă celeilalte, fie pentru a asigura executarea contractului (arrha confirmatoria), fie pentru a’și procura mijlocul de a se putea desista de el (arrha paenitentialis).
  • Among the assets that are the object to public property and are likely to be subject to concession and lease of particular importance are the permanent lawns. A special normative act was dedicated to them, namely the Government Emergency Ordinance No 34/2013, which regulates inclusively the concession and lease of lawns which are in the public or private property of communes, towns and municipalities. As regards the concession and lease of the lawns which are in the public property of the above-mentioned administrative-territorial units, the legislator understood to derogate in some respects from the common law. Thus, the local public authorities are obliged to approve until 1 March every year the concession or lease for a period of 7 years to 10 years, without having the opportunity to assess the appropriateness of these juridical operations, the place of the opportunity study is taken by the pastoral arrangement, the award procedure is triggered at the written request of the animal breeders registered in the National Register of exploitations, there is no possibility of changing the destination of the concessioned or leased assets, even if there would be a consent of the owners, the lease contract for the lawns is non-transmissible even in the hypotheses regulated by Article 1846 of the Civil Code and others. The derogatory legal regime for concessioning of lawns which are in the public property is justified by the importance the legislator gives to the capitalization of these assets. Thus, in the statement of reasons of the cited normative act it is shown that animal breeding is an activity of national interest and the permanent lawns owned by the administrative-territorial units is for many breeders the only source of providing food for these. At the same time, capitalizing these assets is the premise of granting subsidies per area. These subsidies being granted from European funds the importance of the concession of those assets is undeniable. This explains why the administrative-territorial units to which a request for concession has been made do not have the possibility to assess the appropriateness of such a juridical operation, by law being imposed on them an obligation to grant permanent lawns. Correlatively, the animal breeders, natural persons or legal persons, who make in due time requests for concession acquire the right to participate in the award procedure, right which can be defended by resorting to the action in administrative disputes.
  • In this article, the author intends to analyze, by comparison, the terms domicile and residence, as they are used by the constituent legislator in Article 27 of the Constitution, as well as by the Civil Code and the Criminal Code in force. The author points out that the terms of domicile and residence, used in the civil legislation as attributes of identification of the natural person, are different from those covered by the doctrine of criminal law and by that of constitutional law, in the light of the protection of the inviolability of the home of a person, as a legal instrument for the respect of the freedom and private life of persons. The author demonstrates that the purpose of establishing the inviolability of the domicile by constitutional rule is to ensure the respect for the private life of individuals. Particular attention is given to the problems of constitutionalisation of the inviolability of the domicile, as well as of the European protection of the right of every person to the inviolability of their own homes. The author also presents the constitutional guarantees of the inviolability of the domicile and of the residence and how they are materialized by the criminal procedure rules.
  • Art. 1100 dispune că creditorul nu poate fi silit a primi alt lucru de cât acela ce i se datorește, chiar când valoarea lucrului oferit ar fi egală sau mai mare. Acest text, care nu este de cât o consecință a art. 9691 și a interpretărei voinței părților, reproduce No. 530 din obligațiile lui Pothier: «Obicinuit, zice acest autor, nu se poate plăti de cât lucrul datorit; și debitorul nu poate să oblige pe creditorul său a primi drept plată alt ceva de cât ceea ce i se datorește.» «Aliud pro alio, invito creditori, solvi non potest.»2 «Nici creditorul, zice art. 1862 din Codul Calimach (1213 C. austriac), nu poate fi silit să primească împotriva voinței sale alt ceva, fără de cât aceea ce are dorit să ceară, nici datornicul nu este îndatorit să dea sau să facă alt ceva, fără de cât aceea ce este dator să dea sau să facă. Aceasta are tărie și pentru vremea, când, și pentru locul, unde, și pentru chipul cum are să se împlinească îndatorirea.»3
  • The study begins with defining the pre-contractual period and with revealing its importance in the process of forming the contracts by free negotiations or, as the case may be, by conventionally organized negotiations. The deontology of negotiations for the formation of contracts is also defined. It follows from this definition that, mainly, the content of the deontology of free pre-contractual negotiations is made up of the obligations with value of limits of the freedom to negotiate. These obligations or limits are of two types: some of them are legal, being expressly provided by law, by imperative norms or, as the case may be, by dispositive norms, and others implicit. At the core of these obligations is the mandatory legal obligation of the negotiating partners to comply with the exigencies of good faith. Good faith is a proteiform concept or notion, a standard with the value of a general principle, flexible and open, which makes it possible to adapt it to the concrete circumstances and conditions of the formation and execution of each contract. Thus, in the matter of concluding contracts, good faith governs any pre-contractual negotiations, whether they are free or are conventionally organized. Moreover, this obligation is expressly, clearly and imperatively established in the texts of Article 1183 of the Civil Code, being an application of the general principle of good faith in contractual matters, established with special force in Article 1170 of the Civil Code, corroborated with Article 14 of the Civil Code, which concerns the exercise of any right and the execution of any obligation. Being a complex notion, a concept with a proteiform structure and flexible in its content, good faith is the source of the origin and of the existence of the other rules and obligations that make up the content of the deontology of free negotiations for the progressive formation of contracts. From among these obligations there are analyzed the following: the obligation of pre-contractual information, the obligation of confidentiality, the obligation of counselling, the obligation of prudence or abnegation, the obligation of exclusivity, the obligation of coherence and the obligation of cooperation. The author tries to argue that some of these obligations, especially the implicit ones, have as a foundation and source, in addition to the general obligation of good faith, also the principle of contractual solidarism.
  • Pentru existența faptei prevăzute de art. 337 C.pen., refuzul sau sustragerea trebuie să privească supunerea la prelevarea de mostre biologice, spre deosebire de vechea reglementare a faptei, unde se prevedea că acțiunea autorului putea să se refere și la refuzul sau sustragerea de la supunerea testării aerului expirat.
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