In the context of integration of Romania into the European Union and of the normative acts adopted by the Romanian legislator in order to ensure the compatibility of the internal law with the European Union law, the tax disputes and, in particular, tax administrative disputes are conferred a great importance. In the ambiance of the European rules and of our internal law, this study intends to analyze several aspects regarding tax administrative disputes, as well as the application of the principle non bis in idem in the matter of tax administrative disputes, in relation to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and of the European Court of Justice of the European Union.

The current Civil Code advances a detailed regulation of the reparation of damage in case of tort liability, the most important matter of this institution. Being of deep impact in practice, the need for clarity of the new legal provisions is greater than in any other area of regulation. The study proposes their text analysis, emphasizing some shortcomings of the legal terminology used, of the systematization of the matter, but there are reported, in particular, some questionable solutions contrary to the European trends in matters of tort liability.

The author of this study proposes an analysis of the will of the legislator manifested by the introduction of the institution of preliminary chamber judge. Within this study it is made a brief comparison of this institution with some national legislative precedents, but also in relation to the regulations of other states.

The amendments brought to the new Civil Procedure Code by the Law No 138/2014, especially in the matter of enforcement, have produced significant mutations in the matter of administrative disputes as well. In the context of the amending provisions brought to the Law on administrative disputes No 554/2004 by the Law No 138/2014, this study intends to make an analysis of the judicial remedies that may be exercised against the judgments delivered by the background courts in matters of administrative disputes, as well as an analysis of the procedure of enforcement of the final judgments, delivered by these courts.

Pursuant to Article 65 of the (Romanian) Labour Code, the dismissal of the employee due to the dissolution of his workplace, for one or more reasons not related to this employee, involves, according to paragraph (2) of this text, that such a dissolution „be effective and have a real and serious cause”. Having a view that in the case law there is a difference of opinions on the above-mentioned phrase, the author makes an exhaustive analysis of the text of Article 65 and comes to the firm conclusion that, in case of dispute, the court must determine whether, in this case: – the dissolution of the workplace has occurred due to a real cause, therefore the cause was objective, of an undeniable nature; – the cause is serious, so it has a certain degree of gravity, with harmful consequences for the employer, thus requiring the dismissal of the employee; – if, following the principle of good faith, the employer has used, prior to dismissal, all the other possible legal remedies, so that the dismissal had only been a last resort.

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.