This study proposes a comparative analysis of the norms of incrimination which include under the incidence of the criminal law some deeds recognized as international crimes through conventions and treaties. The crimes included in Title XII – Crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in the Romanian Criminal Code and the Crimes against the peace and security of mankind, war crimes defined by the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova are studied by the comparison method. From the comparison made the author comes to the conclusion that both the Romanian legislation and the legislation of the Republic of Moldova have fully complied with the international provisions in the field of regulation of international crimes. In addition, it is appreciated that both states, through their own legislative regime, have taken steps to make the national laws uniform with the international regulations, in order to provide a unitary framework in respect of sanctioning of the international crimes.

This study addresses, from a practical perspective, the freezing order referred to in the Law No 302/2004 on international judicial cooperation in criminal matters and presents some of the steps to be taken by the criminal investigation bodies from tracing an asset for which there is an associated alert, in accordance with the Decision 2007/533/JHA of the Council of Europe of 12 June 2007 on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II), and by the recognition and enforcement of the freezing order.

In this article the author’s opinion is in favour of the existence of the principle of the legality of misconducts, in the sense that in order for a certain illegal act to constitute such a misconduct it must be qualified as such by law, as the case may be, by statutory, contractual dispositions or unequivocally resulting from the legal orders of the hierarchical leaders. It can not be arbitrarily or subjectively determined by the employer, according to his discretionary will. From this point of view there is a complete resemblance to the criminal law which enshrines the principle of legality of incrimination, that is of the establishment and enumeration of the offences – the sole basis of the criminal liability.

The emergence of the Law No 76/2012 for the implementation of the Law No 134/2010 on the Code of Civil Procedure had great influence on the Government Emergency Ordinance No 34/2006 on the award of public procurement contracts. The latter stated that, in the matter of claims for compensation for damage caused during the public procurement procedure, the way of attack is an appeal on law submitted within 5 days of the communication. Difficulties with the publication and entry into force of the Law No 76/2012 were felt because it provided that the appeal would be the remedy in the matter, but before it came into force, the Government Emergency Ordinance No 34/2006 was amended by the Government Emergency Ordinance No 77/2012 which was approved by the Law 193/2013 and which left unchanged the way of attack. To solve the problems related to the succession in time of the laws, the High Court of Cassation and Justice by the Decision No 20/2015 of 5 October 2015 on the examination of the appeal in the interest of the law formulated by the Board of the Suceava Court of Appeal determined that the appeal on law is the only way of attack in the matter. Problems of interpretation have not stopped here because, while the High Court has made compulsory the way of attack, it did not make any mention of the term of exercise. Thus, a non-unitary practice has emerged because some courts have considered that the term of exercise is that of appeal, i.e. 5 days, while others have applied the general term. In our view, the time limit for exercising the appeal on law cannot be considered to be 5 days, because in this situation it would only mean that there was a replacement of the term „appeal” with „appeal on law”, but the general term provided by the Code of Civil Procedure shall apply.

The participation of a tenderer in insolvency in a procedure for the award of a public procurement contract is regulated, mainly, by the directives on public procurement and by the laws which transpose them in the Member States. Within the current generation of directives on public procurement, the exclusion of the tenderer in insolvency is still classified into the category of facultative reasons of exclusion. However, as an element of novelty, if a Member State of the European Union decides to turn this reason of exclusion from facultative into mandatory, the State has the right to regulate certain circumstances in which the contracting authorities are prohibited from excluding such tenderer from the procedure. Whenever such regulation is contained in the national acts of transposition of directives, the contracting authority becomes bound to establish whether the conditions that impose the maintenance of the tenderer the procedure are met. The Romanian legislator has chosen to regulate that the contracting authority can not exclude from the award procedure the tenderer that is in the phase of observation or reorganization, if certain conditions are met. Having in view this obligation to establish whether certain conditions are met in order to maintain the tenderer in the phase of observation or of reorganization, as well as the amendments brought by the new directives in the matter of exercise of the right of the contracting authority to request clarifications, it is important to determine the extent to which, under the influence of the new regulations, the assessment commission will have to take a proactive approach or not, in order to decide whether to exclude or not such a tenderer.

The obligations in solidum represent a controversial category of obligations, the controversy existing both in the Romanian and in the French doctrine. The legislator that created the current Civil Code did not outline the legal regime of the obligations in solidum, these not being mentioned among the other complex obligations. It must be noted that the obligations in solidum constitute a separate category of obligational relations with a plurality of subjects, exception from the rule of division by the operation of law of the obligations between creditors and debtors, and therefore we have considered that it is however required that, in the future, the matter of these obligational relations should be clarified by the legislator, as a legal reality in the landscape of complex obligations, which is why we will further make a theoretical analysis thereof. In this study, the defining features and legal characters of the obligations in solidum, the scope of application and the legal effects have been considered, among others.

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).

Electoratul este o funcțiune politică, iar nu un drept. Indivizii au un drept anterior legei pozitive, și anume acela de a fi considerați ca cetățeni politici sau, cum spune Aristot, „omul este un animal social”, zoon potitikon1. Începând dela germanul Altusius, după cum stabilește Gierke, și până în timpurile noastre, doctrinarii politici consideră pe individ ca făcând parte integrantă din marele suveran, consideră voința lui ca alcătuind voința colectivă a corpului social, numit Stat. Locke, Rousseau, Blakstone, Barclay, Loyseau și alți cugetători, fiecare cu elementele ce le sunt personale, au format școală, și un corp de doctrină, susținut de o literatură vastă, întemeiază dreptul primar al indivizilor pe conceptul suveranităței legale. Suveranitatea, în accepțiunea ei juridică, „dă, după Esmein, opiniunei publice o forță superioară, o expresie precisă, o valoare juridică, o autoritate legală”.

Part of EU law – both primary and especially secondary – waste problem is a complex multi-faceted one in its aspects. Since the first programs of action on the environment (EAP) – the first (1973–1977), the second (1977–1983) – to the last, the seventh such program (2013–2020) entitled A better environment for a better life, the challenge of waste is dealt with either issue on its own, or as part of wider objectives. Whatever the approach, solving subordinates to old or new principles of environmental law as formulated in the first EAP and then developed in other programs of action. These are: prevention is better than cure; EIA should be considered at an early stage of decision making; exploitation of nature by means of causing significant damage to the ecological balance should be avoided; scientific knowledge must be improved to allow for appropriate action; „polluter pays” principle, the polluter should bear the cost of prevention and environmental restoration after damage thereto; activities of a Member State shall not cause damage to the environment of other States.

This study emphasizes that, from a substantial point of view, the criteria required to be fulfilled for cataloguing a deed as pertaining to the criminal domain are: the qualification of the deed in the domestic law, the nature of the deed and the purpose and the severity of the sanction. Formally, an official report of finding and sanctioning the contravention which represents at the same time also a criminal charge in the conventional sense must cumulatively include the description of the deed and the presentation of the legal classification. The effect of classifying the report of finding and sanctioning the contravention in the category of the criminal charge in a conventional sense is given by the fact that to the procedure for finding and sanctioning the contravention there are attached its own guarantees of a fair trial. The presumption of lawfulness of the report is compatible with the presumption of innocence only if it respects certain limits, taking into account the gravity of the stake and protecting the rights of the defence. The limits of the presumption of lawfulness of the official report, in the context of protecting the rights of the defence, are: the imperative that the deed be perceived directly, through its own senses, by the fact-finding agent and the exigence not to impose on the person concerned an impossible task, as regards the administration of the proof to the contrary.

Seen by Aristotle as a pure ornamental rhetorical figure, the metaphor is no longer intended in the 21th century to embellish poetical expression, but to generate new forms of access to knowledge, leading from a paradigm of expressive semantic regime to a semantic cognitive regime. It is considered today that the metaphor is not only related to the literary style, but to the whole of human sciences. Even the definition of the right has fuelled an abundant literature that is lost in the darkness of times, and which seems to have failed to reach a right conclusion, as lawyers still seek a definition for their concept of law. This is because the meaning of law, its force and its reason to be keep an irreducible part of mystery, a mystery derived, in part, from the fact that the right term is a metaphor and, like any metaphor, linguistically materializes the cognitive processes of communication and provides, by analogy, an imaginative support that binds it to an already familiar conceptual circuit.

In this study, the author brings back to memory a doctrinal discussion, inspired by the decision of a tribunal (seized as a court of judicial control), published by the „Romanian Journal of Law”, in two issues, in the period between 1983 and 1984, a discussion in which its protagonists, accepting the idea of an extensive interpretation of the provisions of the old Civil Procedure Code regarding the procedure of verification of scripts, concluded that this procedure may also cover the application for summons, in case that one of the applicants claims that he did not initiate the trial, the signature on the application is not his, nor did he mandate his brother (the co-applicant) to initiate the trial in his name. The doctrinaires have reached, in illo tempore, to the conclusion that the denial of the signature on the application for summons by the person to whom the document is attributed, in fact challenging of the quality of party to the trial, as an applicant, may be invoked, for the first time, also in the means of appeal, the court of judicial control following to submit the application for the procedure of verification of scripts. The tribunal has appreciated that the verification of the signature on the application for summons could only be made by its indictment as false and sending the case to the prosecutor. This point of view was not accepted by the person filing the recourse who considered that the proof of his statements could also be made through a procedure of verification of scripts of the document, before the civil court (which could order, if necessary, a graphological expertise to be made), not wanting to expose his brother, or himself, to criminal investigations. The fact that the second author involved in the discussion claimed the lack of consistency of the claim that the person filing the recourse has not acquired the quality of party (namely of appellant), since he could only exercise the recourse as a party (and not as a third party), has offered the occasion to the last two authors participating in the doctrinal discussion to make the distinction between the quality of party to the trial and the processual quality.

The legislative unification was the main national project of the Unified Romania. The necessity of achieving this project was emphasized starting right with the days immediately following the declarations of unification of the representatives of the three historical provinces (Basarabia, Bucovina and Transylvania) with the Old Kingdom, and the effort for its achievement continued, in a sinuous dynamics, until after the fatidic year 1940. With very few exceptions, the jurists across the country have declared to be in favour of the legislative unification, regardless of the fact that their opinion has been expressed from the chair, in university studies and classes, in the activity of the unification commissions or of the Legislative Council or in the pretorium of justice.

After the First World War, six different systems of civil law were enforced in Greater Romania. The conflicts among these systems were settled through interprovincial law, carved by scholars and jurisprudence according to the Private international law template. This paper aims to present the choice-of-law rules and the jurisdiction grounds of the Romanian interprovincial law. The choice-of-law rules were organized according to the following principles: the status and capacity of persons were subjected to the law of the domicile of origin, movables and real estates were governed by lex rei sitae and the formal validity of legal act was subjected to the place where the act was concluded. The effects of acquired rights were subjected to the local law. Their enforcement was governed by lex loci executiones. Only the exclusive jurisdiction rules of the local law ought to be observed by the judge. For the rest of the jurisdiction rules, the local judge had to follow the jurisdictional grounds provided in the Civil Procedure Code of the Old Kingdom of Romania. The judicial decisions delivered in one province were enforced without exequatur in the other provinces.

This study analyzes briefly the new rules of the private international law of the European Union applicable to cross-border insolvency, contained in the Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast) and applicable in their large majority starting with 26 June 2017. The study presents the legislative history of cross-border insolvency in the Union, the context of the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/848 and the objectives aimed thereby. Similarly, there are briefly presented the scope of application of the Regulation, the rules on international jurisdiction, the main and secondary insolvency proceedings, the law applicable to insolvency proceedings and their effects, the recognition of the judgment for opening the insolvency proceedings, the insolvency proceedings applicable to companies of the group and the insolvency registers.

The new Criminal Code has introduced the imputability as essential feature of the offence. In the current meaning, imputability also includes guilt. Nevertheless, the legislator has mentioned also guilt as essential feature of the offence, together with imputability. The author analyzes to what extent the two essential features of the offence are complementary or exclude each other.

The way of exercising the parental rights and duties suffered after the adoption in 2009 of the Civil Code significant amendments as compared to the previous regulation. At the time of elaboration of the current Criminal Code, especially of the Chapter reserved to the family offences, this aspect has not been taken into account, so currently it is established the lack of synchronicity between the two regulations. The current regulation of the offence of non-compliance with the measures regarding minors, provided by Article 379 of the Criminal Code, refers to family relations that do not cover the new socio-economic realities, in which it is witnessed the labour migration from Romania to other states, in many cases doubled by the dissolution of some families. Similarly, the situations in which the children are left in the care of other persons or where the distance between the child and one or both parents is beyond the borders of a state become increasingly frequent.

Neutral power can manifest itself in modern liberal democracies also in the form of autonomous authorities. Their neutrality is based on two kinds of reasons. The first category involves the positioning of the neutral authorities outside the separation of powers in the state, their reactive (not active) political character and their role of balancing the separate powers of the state or of balancing the relations between the state and civil society. They are in the Romanian law authorities with constitutional status. The second category of authorities that call/consider themselves neutral founds its position on the neutrality of the experts in their structure. They have in the Romanian Constitution the status of some atypical, autonomous administrative authorities. Modern states are based on political freedom, i.e. on the liberation of man from objective laws. The expression of this freedom substantiates all the institutional mechanisms of modern constitutionalism. In exchange, the autonomous administrative authorities are set up to release the regulation of certain social mechanisms of political influence. They are not based on modern political freedom. Formed of experts who know the „objective” laws of social development and apply them „scientifically”, these authorities are „objective”. It is thus created a dichotomy: the people or the expert? The increasingly dense contemporary option for the expert can lead to significant risks for the human rights and for the democratic system.