-
The public order provisions supplement the law of parties. Their relevance is optional and subject to the compliance of the behaviour of the party at fault. In case of non-compliance, specific responsibility for European funds for the public procurement contracts financed from these funds is the legal means that will restore the contractual order. This specific responsibility represents a legal “lever” which allows to the state bodies to intervene in any situation and whenever it finds irregularities in the management of the European funds. The way of creating the legal liability relationship raised more controversy, whose substance will be displayed below. -
The Competition Law no. 21/1996 and the secondary regulations issued for its enforcement advise the parties involved in a merger, assessed as having serious doubts with a normal competitive environment, to propose to the Competition Council a number of commitments aimed at removing these doubts and ultimately lead to achieving a decision authorizing the notified transaction. The purpose of this article is to analyze, on the one hand, the current legal framework of the commitments which may be undertaken by the parties in the context of certain mergers, the procedure for the proposal, the undertake and the approval of the commitments and, on the other hand, the practice of the Competition Council on this topic. -
The sanction for the non-observance of the right of access to justice in the case of Iosif v. Romania, obliged the Romanian State to take the necessary measures to prevent similar breaches in the future. Undoubtedly, however, a non-unitary case law exists further in the matter of granting the public legal aid in relation to the bail. To allow the inadmissibility of the exemption or decrease of the bail amount – majority in practice – involves, in the author’s opinion, to accept the imposition of a real “obstacle” to the free access to justice. Therefore, the granting of the public legal aid regarding the stamp duty is futile as long as the possibility of granting the public legal aid in relation to the bail payment, is not recognized.
-
The article is based on a constant case law of the Constitutional Court of Romania where the expression of “interstitial rule” appears as a leitmotif. Under this rule, any rule of law of the European Union whose content is sufficiently clear, precise and unambiguous, and at the same time proves a certain level of constitutional relevance, will be applied within a compliance control operated by the constitutional court. Therefore, these conditions are examined in detail and also some legal proposition is designed to facilitate the situation of the direct “beneficiary” of such an enforcement – the European litigant.
-
This study aims to develop concepts already outlined in the doctrine, but in the light of the modern law on self-defence and exceeding its limits, containing transitional issues in relation to the new Criminal Code, accompanied by the case law up to date and reasonable own notes, while emphasizing the theoretical and practical controversies encountered. The article is prepared in an analytical style, the author reveals the key aspects regarding certain particularities and difficulties arising from the combination of the letter of the law with its enforcement. In addition to the aforementioned aspects, certain elements related to the comparative law are present, and the provisions of the (European) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning self-defence, as well as de lege ferenda proposals.
-
The article analyzes the specific references that an offence notice has to contain compulsorily, stating an offence of the regime of driving on public roads. Although the elements of the road traffic report shall be determined by the framework law in the contravention matter, respectively the Government Ordinance no. 2/2001, the specificity of the road traffic offenses require certain specific features of these notices, especially about the description way of the act recorded as an offence, about the legal classification of the offense and the application of additional sanctions.
-
Potrivit art. 2781 alin. (8) lit. c) C.pr.pen., judecãtorul pronunțã soluția: „admite plângerea, prin încheiere, desființeazã rezoluția sau ordonanța atacatã și, când probele existente la dosar sunt suficiente, reține cauza spre judecare, în complet legal constituit, dispozițiile privind judecata în primã instanțã și cãile de atac aplicându-se în mod corespunzãtor”(cu notã criticã).
-
ACȚIUNE CIVILÃ. ASIGURÃTOR DE RÃSPUNDERE CIVILÃ În conformitate cu dispozițiile Legii nr. 136/1995, instanța dispune obligarea asigurãtorului de rãspundere civilã, în mod direct, în limita obligației sale contractuale, la plata despãgubirilor cãtre partea civilã (Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție, Secția penalã, decizia nr. 3405 din 23 octombrie 2012).
-
The author analyzes the legal status of undue payment, regarded as a source of civil obligations, such as they results in the texts of the new Civil Code. It has been specified since the beginning of the study that in general no essential amendments were reported in relation to the definition and existence conditions of this legal deed. However, it is noted as a novelty that the rules of undue payment in the new legislative environment apply also when the payment consists of the provision of services or execution of works. Likewise, the new Civil Code, unlike the old regulation, does not set forth anymore expressly the condition that the payment be made in error by solvents; however, the author argues, with convincing arguments, that the error of solvens is usually an actually relative prerequisite of the undue payment. A large space is given to the obligation to reimburse the undue payment and the rules applicable to it regarding the existence, the limits and its manner of execution. Most of these rules are located in a separate title of the Civil Code (Art. 1635 to 1649) and apply, with some exceptions, to all reimbursement obligations, regardless of their source. The author notes that, in their content, these rules contain many new elements compared to the old Civil Code, which tries and manages to examine carefully, formulating relevant solutions and answers. -
This article aims to present the main aspects of the legal marriage age, as governed by the new Romanian Civil Code. After a brief introductory part, the legal provisions regulating marriage at the age of majority are examined. Further, the provisions of the Civil Code regulating marriage before the age of majority are examined, and the conditions under which the minor may enter into marriage are debated: the child reaches the age of 16, there are good reasons, the existence of a medical certificate, the existence of consents required by law, respectively the parents’ consent or the consent of one of their parents or if appropriate, of the guardian and in their absence, of the person or authority which was entitled to exercise the parental rights and the guardianship court authorization. In the final part the conclusions drawn from this study are highlighted.
-
This article discusses the material and territorial jurisdiction for the settlement in the matter of land fund disputes. The material jurisdiction is examined in terms of art. 94 item 1. letter j), art. 94 items 3 and 4, Art. 95 item 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the special regulations contained in Law no. 18/1991, as republished, and the territorial jurisdiction of the perspective of art. 107 para. (1), art. 117 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the special law. The jurisdiction issue concerns the various actions on the land fund, arising from the enforcement of the Law no. 18/1991, as republished. The regulation of the jurisdiction of the actions settlement in the matter of the land fund, in favor of the same court, is proposed de lege ferenda.
-
On the occasion of the modification of the claims regarding the establishment of a seizure, the judge of the cause of action should examine to what extent, from the psychological and legal point of view, the active involvement of the creditor – most often the single litigant who knows the existence of the file – prejudices certain fundamental principles of the civil trial such as the principle of the equality of arms or the principle of contradictoriality. The simple record of the presence of the party, in the absence of the other party, is sufficient to affect, by itself, these cardinal ordinances of the civil trial. The principle of availability cannot justify a proportional reduction in the amount of the bail in relation to the reduction of the sum to the amount to which the establishment of the seizure is required; otherwise, it would create an insurmountable “obstacle” in the path of the debtor which, “exposing” the abusive approach of the creditor subsequently, would be obliged to have its fill of an inappropriate bail of the suffered prejudice.
