-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Commercial competition is „a social patrimonial or non-patrimonial relationship, arising between natural or legal persons engaged in economic activities, based on the property right, equal opportunity for competitors, the freedom of action for enterprises, the freedom of choice for consumers and the obligation of the participants in these relationships to enable the exercise of the mentioned rights, in order to ensure a degree of rivalry between competitors which would bring benefits to the consumers, in terms of price, quality of the marketed goods and services”. Competition can be manifested in various forms, namely: perfect competition, also called pure; real perfect competition; imperfect competition; monopolistic competition. From a different perspective, namely that of the respect for fair customs and of the general principle of good faith, the law distinguishes between fair competition and unfair competition. Fair competition is „the situation of rivalry on the market, in which each enterprise tries to simultaneously obtain sales, profit and/or market share, offering the best practical combination of prices, quality and related services, by respecting the fair customs and the general principle of good faith” [Article 11 a) of the Law No 11/1991 on combating unfair competition]. „Unfair competition is... the commercial practices of the enterprises that contravene to the fair customs and to the general principle of good faith and which cause or may cause damages to any market participants” [Article 2 (1) of the Law No 11/1991]. Price is an essential indicator of the social reality and also a market instrument. In the doctrine the market price is defined as „a quantity of money that the buyer is willing to offer and can offer to the producer in return for the good he can offer”. It may have anti-competitive nature when it is derisory or contrary to fair customs.
-
This study aims at advancing solutions in view of correctly construing and interpreting certain provisions regulated under Law No 303/2004 on the status of judges and public prosecutors, in view of determining whether ex-judges and public prosecutors are entitled to benefit from the recalculation of their service pensions as a result of reaping the length of service obtained from practicing as lawyers, after retirement.
-
The Decision of the Constitutional Court of Romania No 405/2016, referring to the plea of unconstitutionality of the provisions of Article 246 of the Criminal Code of 1969, of Article 297 (1) of the Criminal Code and of Article 132 of the Law No 78/2000 on preventing, discovering and sanctioning of corruption acts (hereinafter referred to as „Decision No 405”)1, is not a mere interpretative decision2 whereby, following the admission of a plea of unconstitutionality, it is established that a text of law is constitutional only provided that a certain wording has a certain meaning3. The recitals of the Decision No 405, to which there have been added, shortly after, those included in the Decision No 392/2017, referring to the plea of unconstitutionality of the provisions of Article 248 of the Criminal Code of 1969, of Article 297 (1) of the Criminal Code and of Article 132 of the Law No 78/2000 on preventing, discovering and sanctioning of corruption acts4 (hereinafter referred to as „Decision No 392”), have emphasized the fact that the current rules of incrimination of the deeds of abuse of office, once clarified the meaning of the phrase „defectively fulfils”, still establish a criminal liability that rather acts with priority, and not according to ultima ratio principle, and the constitutive elements of the offence do not meet the standards of drafting of such legal norms identified in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as „ECHR”), the United Nations Convention against Corruption5, as well as in various reports and positions assumed by the European Union bodies on this subject. For the assumption that these observations of the Constitutional Court would determine the legislator to reflect on the necessity to reconfigure the legal provisions in question, the Court has indicated certain points of reference that should be considered in order to ensure a regulation compatible with the international and European standards mentioned.