Loading...
  • Law does obviously not benefit from the privilege of having its own exhaustive language. We might say that most concepts used in law are borrowed from other branches of knowledge. The quite rare concepts that are its own often do not receive a definition that can be classified, according to the methodology of the act of definition itself, as “legal”. The amalgamation of legal terminology with the economic, political, sociological or philosophical terminology, without revising the concepts and without their clear understanding in the areas of knowledge from where they come makes the doctrine and the case law too often flat and stereotyped, if not even chaotic from the conceptual point of view. Lawyers are no longer seen as persons of learning, who try to explain the nature of things through justice, but as simple technicians, who apply concepts taken from other social-human sciences. Under these conditions, one of the fundamental problems for lawyers is to explain a fact that seems to be overlooked by our current culture: what is meant by a legal concept? Afterward, it becomes equally important to understand the way in which the non-legal concepts used in law should be revised, namely what the standards of the legal definition of concepts are. The above-mentioned article attempts to answer to these challenges.
  • Mărturisesc că, atunci când am ales titlul acestui studiu, am interferat cu modelul de prezentare în două părți, introdus de un cunoscut colaborator și prieten, specialist în legile internetului, Bogdan Manolea, care, cu ceva ani în urmă, într-o prestigioasă conferință cu prezență internațională, identifica o primă parte anarhică și o a doua tehnică a discursului său. De ce o perspectivă românească? Pentru a sublinia critic modelul, mereu altfel, de abordare a reformelor din sistemul judiciar românesc, pe tiparul „teoriei mixte”, pe care, ani de-a rândul, generație după generație, la aproape toate disciplinele de studiu, dascălii noștri au încercat să ne-o inoculeze ca pe un vaccin, în dorința de a ne obișnui, în realitate, cu compromisul, vecin cu improvizația, de la care a împrumutat caracterul definitiv. Noi nu copiem, noi inovăm, mințindu-ne adesea că adaptăm diverse instituții, proceduri, reguli din tot atât de diverse surse, deși, funcțional, asemenea corpului biologic, aceste grefe haotice și repetate ajung să fie refuzate sau să schimonosească organismul nostru judiciar, altfel suficient de robust prin robustețea componenților săi.
  • Dealing with the issue of the Romanian judge, as a guarantor of the public international law enforcement, the author discusses: the issue of the Romanian judge’s power to interpret the conventional international law; issues regarding difficulties in the enforcement of the public international law by the Romanian courts due to the absence of similar internal rules; decisions of the international courts of justice and their effects on the internal legal proceedings (Romanian).
  • The topic covered in this study is related to one of the few polemics that took place in the pages of the Romanian Law Magazine in the ’80s. In Issue 1/1987 of the magazine, Octavian Cojocaru criticized in the study „Judicial rehabilitation. Application made by the spouse or close relatives, after the death of the convicted person, before the execution of the sentence” a correct sentence of the Suceava County Tribunal, pronounced in 1985, in disagreement with the provisions of the Criminal Code in force at that time and against a decision of the Supreme Tribunal, according to which the convicted person who had died before the execution of the sentence could no longer be rehabilitated. Later, in 1988, Valeriu Ciucă, a judge at the same Suceava County Tribunal, published in the same magazine a critical article related to the case law note signed by Octavian Cojocaru, which shows, with solid arguments, that the decision pronounced by Suceava County Tribunal was correct from a juridical point of view.
  • This study sets some reference points for a new institution regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code – the judge of rights and freedoms – from a perspective which stresses its role in protecting the rights and fundamental freedoms, as they are established by the Constitution and by the international treaties on human rights to which Romania is a party.
  • This study analyzes the new structure of the judgment based on the guilty plea, describes the conditions of application of this simplified procedure in comparison with the previous regulation, the rules of conduct of the special judicial investigation, the solutions which can be issued by courts in order to solve the criminal action, all these by emphasizing the advantages or shortcomings of the new institution.
  • The premises for the adoption of the Decree No 195/2020 on the establishment of the state of emergency in Romania were the evolution of the epidemiological situation in Romania and the assessment of public health risk for the next period, which indicates a massive increase in the number of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, having regard to the fact that failure to take urgent, exceptionally social and economic measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection among the population would have a particularly serious impact, mainly on the right to life, and, in the alternative, on the right to health of individuals
  • The theme of this study concerns the distinction between the source of fiscal obligations (chargeable event of the tax base), on the one hand, and the individualization of these obligations through various fiscal administrative acts, issued for the application of the legal rules of tax law, on the other hand. In this regard, the author considers both the current Fiscal Procedure Code (the Government Ordinance No 92/2003, in force until 31 December 2015) and the new Fiscal Procedure Code (the Law No 207/2015), which expressly repeals the current Fiscal Procedure Code and shall enter into force on 1 January 2016. The author’s conclusion is that the source of the fiscal obligations is not the law itself, but the legal act, licit or illicit, which gives rise to the fiscal obligatory relation under the terms provided by law and materialized in the individual acts of application of law.
  • This paper enumerates and analyses the main sources of the Romanian fiscal law.
  • După o părere foarte răspândită, întreaga operă legislativă a anilor 1864–1866 ar fi fost o simplă traducere a unor legiuiri apusene, întocmită abia în câteva săptămâni.
  • The international treaties on human rights are the fundamental conventional sources de jure applicable in this area and at the level of the European Union. The evolution of their content relevant to the fundamental rights is spectacular, starting from the lack of interest in terms of regulations expressed in the Treaty of Rome signed in 1957, to the rules of reference to the (European) Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms contained in the Single European Act or the Treaty of Maastricht and up to the establishment of the European Union’s own protection mechanism under the Treaty of Lisbon and the Charter of fundamental rights.
  • Family relationships are an area of great interest due to its intimacy and sensitivity. Because of the unpredictability of modern life, many families are falling apart. Thus, the issue of dissolution of marriage, whether through divorce or separation, is of paramount importance for modern society. Both the European Union and some Member States, especially the predominantly Catholic ones, have adapted to religious realities and regulated spouses’ separation through secular laws. The purpose of this article is to reveal that the Romanian law has the institution of spouses’ separation which produces, however, only effects of canon law, and not of civil law. The methods used in support of our thesis are analysis and synthesis. In Romania, the state recognized the Canonical Codes of the Roman-Catholic and Oriental Churches that provide for separation. But it denies any civil, secular effects of the institution. It is high time for the Romanian legislator to regulate the institution of spouses’ separation whether by altering the Civil Code or through a concordat between the state and the Holy See. The secular effects of spouses’ separation will protect the religious freedom of the Catholic people and the traditions of the Roman Catholic denomination. Moreover, introducing legal separation in the Romanian law will ensure a better application of the private international law of the European Union which provides for the international jurisdiction and for the law applicable to such separation.
Folosim fisierele tip cookie-uri pentru a va oferi cea mai buna experienta de utilizare a website-ului. Navigand in continuare ori ramanand doar pe aceasta pagina va exprimati acordul asupra folosirii cookie-urilor. Daca doriti sa renuntati la acestea, va rugam sa consultati Politica de Utilizare a Cookie-urilor. Anumite parti ale website-ului nu vor mai functiona corect daca stergeti toate cookie-urile. Citește mai mult... Ok