-
Calea de atac a contestației poate fi exercitată, în condițiile art. 347 C.pr.pen., inclusiv atunci când niciun participant la procesul penal nu a formulat cereri sau ridicat excepții în procedura camerei preliminare. În acest scop, încheierea prin care judecătorul finalizează procedura de cameră preliminară trebuie comunicată participanților, eventuala omisiune putând fi revelată inclusiv în calea de atac a apelului, cu consecința regresării procedurii din faza judecății în faza camerei preliminare (cu notă aprobativă). -
The absolutisation of the effects of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union or of the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in areas not falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the European Union (EU or the Union) or in areas of shared jurisdiction where EU no longer wishes to legislate on the basis of the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality can lead to mistakes in the application of the national law by the law courts of the Member States of EU. In this article the author identifies such a case in the field of access to the data stored by the suppliers of public electronic communications networks and by the suppliers of publicly available electronic communication services and brings arguments to remedy this situation.
-
In this study, the author presents some aspects of the problems of proving with witnesses of the own assets, in the relations between spouses, over three periods of the legislative evolution in Romania: the period from 1 February 1954, when the Family Code entered into force, to 1 October 2011, when the new Civil Code entered into force; the period from the entry into force of the new Civil Code and 15 February 2013 (the date when the new Civil Procedure Code entered into force); the period that began on 15 February 2013, when the new Civil Procedure Code entered into force, a date since when the matter of proving the own assets in the relations between spouses is governed by the new Civil Code and by the new Civil Procedure Code. In this part of the study the author notes that Article 316 of the new Civil Procedure Code contains a wording likely to generate divergent case law concerning the proof with witnesses of the own assets in the relations between spouses. The author argues the opinion that, from 15 February 2013 as well, the proof of the own assets in the relations between spouses can be given by any means of evidence, including the proof with witnesses, which, however, in case of the opposition from one of the spouses, can not be relatives and in-laws in rank prohibited by law. In this context, the author makes a de lege ferenda proposal for the amendment of the content of Article 316 of the new Civil Procedure Code, in order to prevent the emergence of a non-unitary case law. The proposal is to replace the phrase and other family relations with the phrase and other similar family relations.
-
The rule of exclusion remains one of the most controversial issues in the American constitutional doctrine in the field of criminal procedure. The American jurists constantly point out that the rule of exclusion is unique in the field of law, being specific to the American law. However, an increasing number of countries adopt in their legislative system provisions to exclude illegally obtained evidence. This study outlines a few remarks around Article 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code newly introduced in our legislation, trying to bring more clarity on the origin, purpose and ways to invoke the established principle. -
This study is devoted to a very present topic, namely that of the liability of the State and of the magistrates for the judicial errors produced in the criminal cases or other type of cases. After a brief introduction to the subject, the author makes an analysis of comparative law in the matter subject to examination, pointing out that, in most European countries, the dominant system is that of establishing the liability of the State and of the magistrates for the judicial errors. The author also presents us some of the solutions of the common law system, where the principle is that of impunity of the magistrates for the judicial errors. The author emphasizes that, in our law, the liability of the State is the dominant one and it has the character of an objective liability, founded on the provisions of Article 52 (3) of the Romanian Constitution. There are also analyzed in this article the procedural conditions of the liability of the State for the judicial errors. A special place in this study is devoted to the liability of the magistrates, particularly of the judges, for the judicial errors. It is emphasized, in particular, the subsidiary nature of the liability of the magistrates, as well as the fact that their liability may be engaged only under the subjective conditions specifically determined by the law, respectively in the situations where they have acted in their judicial function in „bad faith” or with „obvious negligence”. The author pleads for maintaining this solution in the future as well, the only one that, in his opinion, is meant to achieve the necessary balance between the independence of the judge and the necessary social and legal responsibility. At the end of the study there are also formulated some legislative proposals, such as those relating to setting some common time limits in civil and criminal matters, to establishing the obligation of the State to exercise the action for regress, to the professional liability insurance of magistrates etc.
-
In the new Criminal Procedure Code, the function for verification the sending to trial legality is conducted by a judicial body independent of the Court, the judge for preliminary chamber. In the preliminary chamber procedure, the judge checks the regularity of the referral, the legality of the administration of evidence and of prosecution acts, as well as the jurisdiction of the Court. The Criminal Procedure Code does not provide expressly the type of the act by which the Prosecutor can remedy the deficiencies of the referral. The jurisprudence is not unitary, sometimes recognizing, sometimes penalizing the remedy of the deficiencies of the indictment through different types of procedural acts. The article achieves analysis of doctrine with regard to this issue. The authors motivate the solution that preserves the unity of the sending to Court act, respectively the remake of the indictment. Consequences of the types of solutions adopted in practice are explored from the perspective of the right to defence of the accused person.
-
In this study the author makes an analysis of the institution of waiver of criminal prosecution, including from the perspective of other systems of law, of the conditions provided by law for ordering the waiver of criminal prosecution, as well as of other optional criteria of opportunity, which must be considered when ordering this solution provided by law. Likewise, he formulates some critical remarks referring to the practice of some units of the prosecutor’s office, the author also making some de lege ferenda proposals on some problematic issues. -
This study deals with the issues related to the regulation included in Article 262 of the new Criminal Code of Romania. The author notes that, as compared to the regulation prior to the entry into force of the new Criminal Code, the taking over in this Code of the norm of incrimination previously included in Article 70 of the Government Emergency Ordinance No 105/2001 on the state border of Romania has been preferred as a reflection of the importance given to the social value of the regime of the state border. At the same time, it is pointed out that the norm in the Code in force is subject to completion by provisions included in other normative acts, inferior to the law, as in the Government Emergency Ordinance No 194/2002 on the regime of foreigners in Romania.
-
This study is meant to analyse the provisions of Article 333 of the Civil Code regarding the preciput clause. Specifically, there are discussed issues such as: the relevant provisions; the definition of the analyzed institution; the subjects, the object and the legal nature of the preciput clause; the legal characters of the preciput; the effects of the preciput clause; inefficiency and enforcement of the preciput.
-
This paper aims to analyze the difficulties which the Romanian judge faces, in the attempt to ensure the exigencies imposed by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights in matters of reasonable time. In this regard, the paper is structured in three parts: the first part briefly presents the Court’s standard as regards the reasonable time; the second part analyzes the compatibility of an institution recently introduced in the Civil Procedure Code – the contestation concerning the delay of the trial (Articles 522–526 of the Civil Procedure Code) – to the notion of effective remedy, within the meaning of Article 6 and Article 13 of the Convention; the last part emphasizes, based on some jurisprudential examples, the risks which the national judge must manage very carefully when he tries to ensure the reasonable time: the risk of acting ultra vires and the risk of creating a non-unitary case-law, thus generating the premises of some new violations of Article 6 of the Convention.
-
The article presents the special cases where the defendant benefits from the mitigating effects of the abbreviated procedure, appreciating that they must also be extended in case the application for judgment has been rejected according to the abbreviated procedure, because the defendant did not recognize all the material acts in the indictment or all the deeds described therein, but after performing the judicial investigation the court retains the factual situation recognized by the defendant. -
The study tries to outline the concept of misuse of law as it is regulated in the new Romanian Civil Procedure Code, starting from the regulations of novelty introduced by the new Civil Code. Recognized in the case-law and in the doctrine as a phenomenon inherent to the exercise of the subjective rights, the misuse of law appears better outlined on procedural level, unlike the substantive law, both with regard to its constitutive elements and the conditions in which it can be found and in respect of the sanctions that may appear. Even if the regulation of the new Civil Procedure Code is wider, a series of discussions raise, further on, the issue of misuse of law in the matter of the right of action under the terms of express sanctioning for bringing, in bad faith, an application for summons or for exercising an obviously unfounded judicial remedy.
