Since the beginning of the 19th century, the phenomenon of immigration has increased in Argentine. In the 20th century, the majority of immigrants came from the European continent. Despite some tempering measures, the immigration to Argentina continues to manifest itself, producing legal consequences. The family relations of foreigners are ruled, like other types of social relations with a foreign element, by private international law. This paper aims to analyse the current state of marriage regulations in Argentine private international law (with brief historical forays to understand the evolution). The scientific impact of this paper is increased by the novelty of the studied legislation and by the low interest that the Romanian doctrine has shown for the legal realities in Latin America. Its conclusions are relevant both to researchers and legal practitioners and to the general public, interested in resolving the many legal issues involved in a marriage with an Argentine citizen or immigration to Argentina.

As a fundamental instrument for ensuring the functioning of the European Union legal order, the action for the non-compliance with the European obligations is the judicial instrument by which the Union authorities, led by the Commission and the Luxembourg jurisdictional structure, exercise direct control over the conduct of the Member States in relation to EU law imperatives. Located somewhere in the middle between the legality control and the action for liability, the non-compliance with the obligations raises separate and complex issues difficult to understand in the absence of the vast jurisdictional experience of the Court of Justice of the European Union. If, under procedural terms, the present action does not present particular challenges, imposing, as a rule, a mechanism for cooperation between the European Commission and the defendant Member State (as a pre-contentious phase), in which the Court of Justice often plays a subsidiary role (contentious phase), from a material point of view, the non-compliance with the European obligations involves different forms and meanings that transcend both the letter and the spirit of the treaties, even in their current form, consolidated after the Treaty of Lisbon (2009). In such a context, the present study aims to review the most frequently used meanings which the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union has given to the phrase „non-compliance with European obligations”, in the light of current regulations, past experiences and, last but not least, the aim pursued by this procedure, namely to sanction any derogation from the uniform and synchronized application of the European Union law.

Confusing subject of study for a jurist, humanity is an evasive notion because it manifests itself in the individual but is, at the same time, external to it; it claims universality but the way each one looks at is as specific as each one. Myth or legal symbol, „humanity” is a term with variable content, both in the common and the legal language, because, at the same time, it represents the human essence, the goodness but also the race, the human species. The various meanings are indissolubly linked because they are intertwined, so that the „individual” humanity, the one that each individual carries himself, is inseparable from the „collective” humanity, the human community. This together construction results from legal instruments which reflect the ambivalence of the concept, the crime against humanity is, at the same time, a crime against the human essence and a crime against the human race, as its constituent elements demonstrate. Through time, humanity has born and fed contradictory legal discourses, so in international law it is more than a „concept slogan”, because its influence is tangible, but nonetheless, humanity has not simplified the international legal order but has made it even more complex.