Loading...
  • This article inspired us by the following situation existing in the legislation and doctrine: The law on county councils does not contain edifying referrals to specific procedures for approving the minutes of county councils meetings (we find also a quasi-similar situation regarding the minutes’ records challenge in court); The doctrine which should have filled this gap is inexistent and is limited to making referrals to other aspects of the minutes, taken from legislation, legislation which, as already mentioned, is extremely vague on this matter; The lack of an administrative procedure code leaves unclear this side of the concrete way for the minutes’ approval. Therefore, starting from the unequal practice of local authorities on the minutes’ approval in court, we shall try, through the arguments in this article, to come to support practitioners in local government and, why not, to also offer a source of inspiration in drafting the Administrative Procedure Code.
  • By the provisions of the Law No 122/2006 on asylum in Romania, as amended and supplemented, the legislator has chosen to derogate from the provisions of common law in the matter of recourse with regard to the time when it starts to run, having as starting point the moment when the judgment of the first instance court was pronounced, without having in view the presence or absence of the party concerned, as well as without taking into consideration the special situation of the asylum seekers from Romania, foreign citizens or stateless persons, most of them not speaking Romanian. This study intends to emphasize how, by this derogation from the processual civil provisions which represent the common law in the matter, it is violated the free access to justice established by the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of Romania, supporting the running of the time limit for recourse from the time of communication of the judgment of the court of first instance, and not from the time of pronouncement.
  • Nu există vreun temei pentru a crea o ordine de preferință a declarațiilor, în sensul reținerii celor date în faza de judecată, în detrimentul celor date în faza de urmărire. Principiul liberei aprecieri a probelor nu permite distincția dintre probele administrate în faza de urmărire și cele administrate în faza de judecată și se opune ca cele din urmă să fie luate în considerare în detrimentul celor dintâi, numai pe criteriul fazei procesuale în care au fost obținute. Singurul criteriu care trebuie avut în vedere atunci când o probă este fie reținută pentru a contura o situație de fapt, fie înlăturată din ansamblul tuturor probelor existente în dosar este cel al coroborării probei în discuție cu celelalte probe administrate.
  • Practica judiciară recentă s-a confruntat cu numeroase frământări în legătură cu îndeplinirea elementelor constitutive ale infracțiunii de abuz în serviciu, prevăzută în art. 297 C.pen. Potrivit acestui articol, constituie infracțiunea de abuz în serviciu „fapta funcționarului public care, în exercitarea atribuțiilor de serviciu, nu îndeplinește un act sau îl îndeplinește în mod defectuos și prin aceasta cauzează o pagubă ori o vătămare a drepturilor sau intereselor legitime ale unei persoane fizice sau ale unei persoane juridice”
  • 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.
  • The new Civil Procedure Code brings some amendments in the procedure of administration of evidence by lawyers, introduced in the Civil Procedure Code of 1865 by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 138/2000. This study details this procedure trying to anticipate a few of the problems that may arise in the judicial practice at the time of using this modality of administration of evidence in the civil lawsuit.
  • After the adoption and the entry into force of the Law on the administrative disputes No 554/2004, subsequently to the constitutional revision of 2003, the problems of the special administrative jurisdictions are of particular interest, being one of the institutions of the public law meant to ensure the celerity of the settlement of disputes, doubled by the guarantee offered to the litigants, concerning the compliance with the constitutional principle of free access to justice, the right to a fair trial and to the settlement of cases within a reasonable time. In this context, the study intends to make an analysis of the constitutionality of the special administrative jurisdictions regulated by the Law No 554/2004 and in some special normative acts, adopted after the constitutional revision from 2003, in relation to the provisions of Article 21 (4) of the Romanian Constitution revised and republished.
  • The article proposes procedural solutions, in compliance with the requirements of the ECHR practice, when changing the legal classification given to the deed, in appeal, by appreciating that the change in the legal classification given to the deed by the act of referral can be made by an undeniable conclusion, prior to the debate on the appeal, or by the conclusion for reinstating the case on the list of cases, provided that the court has debated the appeal, pending further ruling also for the reason concerning the change in the legal classification, which it found to be well-grounded.
  • In this article the author discusses from a constitutional perspective the concept of capital – commonly used by the Constituent Assemblies to designate within the constitutions the headquarters of the national sovereignty authorities. In his comments, the author presents the political conditions and the historical context of choosing Bucharest as residence of the princely court of Walachia mid seventeenth century and the evolution of the city from a historical, political and administrative viewpoint. The study presents in detail the changes suffered by the city of Bucharest during the Organic Regulations that have established administrative measures for its modernization. Bucharest became capital of the United Principalities in 1862 during the reign of Alexandru Ioan Cuza. Since then its status as capital has not been contested anymore, a situation also reflected in provisions of constitutional rank.
  • Conform prevederilor art. 342 C.pr.pen., obiectul procedurii camerei preliminare îl constituie, printre altele, verificarea legalității administrării probelor și a efectuării actelor de către organele de urmărire penală. Cu această ocazie, judecătorul de cameră preliminară este obligat să constate toate încălcările legii, săvârșite cu ocazia efectuării urmăririi penale și să sancționeze aceste încălcări, dispunând una dintre soluțiile prevăzute în cuprinsul art. 346 C.pr.pen.
  • Introducere. Practica judiciară recentă s-a confruntat cu numeroase frământări în legătură cu îndeplinirea elementelor constitutive ale infracțiunii de abuz în serviciu, prevăzută în art. 297 C.pen.
  • The complexity of the problem of configuration of the branches of law requires the recourse to various courts, which, without being infallible, can provide resources to legitimize a solution or another. In this regard, there may be invoked a series of coordinates such as the spirit of the law, as core of the legal knowledge, formed by the contribution of the fundamental concepts, of the principles of law and of its finalities, the interdisciplinary analyzes of the legal phenomenon or the meta-theoretical level of the scientific approach. With regard to this latter point of reference, we are trying to express wider considerations that emphasize plans of specificity, of customization and of specialization, but also processes of generalization and of integration. It is argued that any approach is entitled to cognitively participate in shaping the theoretical or practical solutions. However, no point of view can be declared unique, in a dogmatic, exclusive manner, or infallible, being necessarily open and capable to receive other information in critical or innovating terms, to convert them into a dialectical process of relative and imperfect knowledge, but always perfectible, in relation to a society and to a historical time.
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