-
The system of penalties, although it marked a progress in the evolution of the Romanian penal law, however, if it is critically examined, it evidences the small number of major penalties and, especially, their emphatically repressive character. In this study, the author makes an analysis by comparison of the system of penal sanctions in the new Penal Code as compared to the current regulation, as well as in comparative law. Another issue relates to the impact of normative provisions on the judiciary individualization of penalties with reference to the individualization criteria and the appreciation margin acknowledged to the judge. The author also states that it is useful that the relevant penal regulations should provide the criterion of proportionality for the judiciary individualization of penalties. -
Lately, within the penal lawsuit – in the stage of its prosecution and judgment – due to the impasse of producing evidence facing the prosecution, since the prosecutor issues solutions for not initiating the penal prosecution without factual or legal grounds, with regard to the delator that perpetrated deeds provided by the penal law and closely connected with the crimes for which they ordered the judgment of others, they heard and then obtained that such delators be heard as witnesses and grounded its accusation on their testimonies. The clarification of the capacity in which a delator may be heard within a penal lawsuit appears, therefore, necessary both from a theoretical point of view, and from a practical point of view, and the authors’ approach is trying to respond to this necessity.
-
The above study constitutes a theoretical synthesis of the jurisprudence of the High Court of Cassation and Justice of Romania from the last years in the field of legislation regarding the restitution of the immovable assets abusively taken over by the State in the period comprised between 1945 and 1989; of the interpretation of contracts in consideration of the real will of the parties; of the proxy’s fault in the mandate contract and of certain civil procedure issues, taking into account also the provisions of the new Romanian Civil Code (Law No. 287/ 2009, as amended by Law No. 71/2011), which has recently come into force (as of October 1, 2011).
-
The elaboration of the notarial acts takes place in compliance with some requirements strictly provided in the normative acts. These requirements for the preparation of notarial acts are called rules for drawing up and affect to all notarial acts and actions. The topic covered in this paper is of interest to theorists and law practitioners from the Republic of Moldova and from Romania. In the Republic of Moldova there is a long process of formation and consolidation of notarial legislation. In the absence of a well-elaborated normative framework, the notaries public from the Republic of Moldova apply, here and there, the rules for drawing up the notarial acts inherited ever since the period of the Soviet Union. Another situation exists in Romania, whereas the legislator, by the Law No 36/1995, has established a stable normative framework for regulating notarial law relations. The main objective pursued by the author in the elaboration of the paper consists in the comparative analysis of the common rules for the drawing up the notarial acts through the Romanian and Moldavian legislation. The results of the research are manifested by formulating some conclusions and recommendations for amending the legislation. The theoretical implications of the study are relevant due to the diversity of the doctrinal sources used by the author. An increased attention was paid to Moldavian and Romanian researchers. In addition, the doctrine of the notarial law in the Russian Federation has been considered, which, over many decades, has become traditional in the Republic of Moldova.
-
The hierarchy of legal values and fundamental rights can be achieved with the help of applicable law, interpretation of principles of law and using relevant case law at national level (especially in this case, from Romania), as well as at European level, through the judgments given by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) respects all fundamental rights and freedoms and principles recognized in the Charter as enshrined in the Treaties, in particular respect for private and family life, residence and communications, protection of personal data, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and information, freedom to conduct business, the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, as well as cultural, religious and linguistic diversity. A long list of rights appreciated even by the European legislator in the preamble to the Regulation that could interfere with the right to data protection. The critical analysis is based on the recent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as of the Romanian courts, each of them being involved in the decision-making process regarding the prevalence of fundamental values regarding freedom of expression and protection of data.
-
In the present study, the authors analyze extensively the situations of non-unitary practice that appeared both at the level of the Bureau of the judge of surveillance of deprivation of liberty and at the level of the courts, due to the different ways in which the magistrates understood to deal with the problem of the transfers of the persons deprived of liberty and the legal nature of the transfer decisions issued by the National Administration of Penitentiaries. The purpose of the present analysis is to clarify the regime applicable to requests made by the persons deprived of liberty to cancel the transfer decisions, because the lack of regulation in the Law No 254/2013 regarding the possibility of appeal, as well as of the competent court to resolve the appeals, led to the outline of divergent currents of opinion reflected in the non-unitary solutions given in complaints or appeals.
-
By the Decision on 29th January 2019, in Case No 6080/06 Ahunbay & others v. Turkey (6080/2006), the ECHR has made a great leap forward, by means of the subsequent considerations, in recognizing the general principle of the right of access to common cultural inheritance. The Court has rejected the principal claim as inadmissible (ratione materiae); even though, by finding that the object is related to an evolving field and by considering that given the international instruments and the common ground regarding international legal standards, compulsory or not, it cannot be a priori excluded the existence of a common European and International approach regarding the need to protect the access to cultural inheritance, it has opened significant perspectives for the process of giving this principle a legal shape. Thus, there have been created the premises so that, in the near future, by means of case law, several significant progresses can be made in this field.
-
Treaty of Trianon, an international document of unquestionable political-legal value and, at the same time, of capital value for Romania, which certifies the full legitimacy of its existence inside its current borders – also including Transylvania –, is unconditionally fully valid and thus remains as such, having been applied for a century. It is for the Romanians to comply with the sacred duty to know its provisions as rigorously as possible and to ensure, at any cost and without any hesitation, the strict observance of its provisions. Under no circumstance it is admitted a hesitating or passive attitude, without reply when its validity is questioned. Thus, it is created the impression that Romania would agree that the Treaty of Trianon is no longer of interest to the Romanian State or that there would be some indifference to the regulations which it contains, favouring confusions and forming opinions that prejudice the value of this Treaty.
-
Property (or ownership), seen as a subjective right, is the principle according to which we legally determine who can own what, how and to what extent. The legal conception of property rights is reflected in the economy, and the economy, by the force of its oftentimes ideologically driven mandates, spills over into the realm of the Law, molding our understanding of property to the very same extent that this understanding molds, constrains and defines the economy itself. The right of property, as a legal category, is not fixed and unchanging. On the contrary, property lends itself to a multiplicity of conceptual frameworks, sometimes at odds with one another. The modern understanding of property, however, is deeply indebted to Roman law. The Roman spirit, mercantile par excellence, is embedded into the innermost recesses of our contemporary theories of property rights. All this because the Roman legacy includes a perfectly flexible conceptual toolkit, eminently adapted to the whims of the market. The analysis of all of this constitutes the object of this study.
-
Potrivit art. 181 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 78/2000 pentru prevenirea, descoperirea și sancționarea faptelor de corupție, cu modificările și completările ulterioare, folosirea sau prezentarea cu rea-credință de documente ori declarații false, inexacte sau incomplete, dacă fapta are ca rezultat obținerea pe nedrept de fonduri din bugetul general al Uniunii Europene sau din bugetele administrate de aceasta ori în numele ei, se pedepsește cu închisoare de la 2 la 7 ani și interzicerea unor drepturi.
-
100 years after their conclusion, the Paris Peace Treaties of 1919–1920 are both an important event in history and a founding moment of modern international law. Ending World War I, they have legally established the new state-political realities resulting from the application of the principle of nationalities and the exercising of the right to self-determination by the peoples oppressed by the great European empires, which have led to the emergence of new states or to the consolidation of other existing ones. The new European and international order was founded primarily on the law, the organization of peace and the maintenance of the status quo being entrusted, according to the Covenant, to the League of Nations, the first international institution with universal vocation. New principles of international law have been prefigured, the national state has become the main topic of international life, the subregional collective security organizations (Little Entante, Balkan Pact) have played an important role in the international balance. The legal inheritance of the time 1919–1920 was expressed after the World War II through the Charter that laid the foundations of contemporary international law and the U.N.O. (1945). The Treaty of Versailles with Germany (1919), as well as that of Trianon with Hungary (4 June 1920) are the treaties whose territorial clauses have historically withstood being taken over by the Peace Treaties of 1947 and enshrined by subsequent relevant international acts. The Treaty of Trianon, by its territorial effects, has become the subject of a sustained and permanent action of revisionism by Hungary and anti-revisionism, as a reaction from the other states whose borders have been established thereby.
-
The Treaty of Trianon between the Allied and Associated Powers and Hungary was signed on 4 June 1920 and dramatically changed the political map of Central Europe. Although the system of treaties concluded at the Paris Peace Conference did not prove viable, the political-territorial order created at Trianon – an expression of peoples’ right to self-determination – has survived. The present text aims to examine the circumstances of the conclusion of the Treaty of Trianon, its content and its long-term effects on the central European political order. Finally, the author makes a general evaluation of the Romanian-Hungarian relations in the light of their relation to the provisions of this Treaty.
