Suchergebnisse

Choosing arbitration as a way of resolving legal disputes, it involves the guarantee of principle regarding contractual freedom. This principle is also established in ECtHR's jurisprudence. In this situation the question is whether the court can impose or sanction an arbitration decision that violates the ECtHR rules. Under the ECtHR's jurisprudence, it is not necessarily an arbitration decision to be canceled because it did not correspond to all the guarantees of Article 6. Each contracting State, in principle, can decide the reasons an arbitration decision should be annulled or not. An arbitration agreement, reached between the parties, restricts voluntarily the right to access to courts and dispute settlement in accordance with their rules of procedure. Thus, the parties to an arbitration agreement must be "fully aware" of giving up this fundamental right and once validly waived this right, they cannot plead infringement of it. European Convention on Human Rights is binding on judges only indirectly, only the proceedings of the court in connection with the arbitration proceedings are subject to the European Court of Human Rights, but not the arbitration procedure itself. So, ECtHR in Article 6 (1) of the Convention is not directly imposed to arbitration courts, but obliges courts of contracting states to establish appeal against arbitral order to verify the correctness of the arbitration proceedings and to quash decisions that disregard the fundamental procedural guarantees laid down in the European Convention on Human Rights.

The arbitration agreement constitutes the main element of private arbitration. Arbitration Convention creates essentially a double effect, a main direct negative (one to evade certain disputes under the jurisdiction of state power) and a positive one, complementary (to give judges the power to decide the dispute in question). The main effect called negative effect of the arbitration agreement (arbitration compromise clause), is to remove, to dispute subject to its jurisdiction courts that would have had in the absence of the arbitration clause jurisdiction to resolve the dispute between the parties. Once removed jurisdiction of the courts, the dispute shall be resolved by the arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with the arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreement grants the arbitral tribunal with the power to judge a dispute, checking by its own court jurisdiction on that issue. Literature called the verification principle Kompetenz-Kompetenz. Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle empowers the arbitral court to decide on its own jurisdiction. For arbitration agreement to be effective, it must result from genuine consent of the parties, also to correspond to legal national rules. In examining objectives' arbitrability of international disputes, a court must apply its own conception of international public policy. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is applied in the same way both for litigation through the courts as well as arbitration. As a result, the European Court of Human Rights determined that the requirements of Article 6 must be applied by arbitral tribunals.

Such famous jurists as H. Kelsen, J. Chevallier, Giorgio del Vecchio, A. Hauriou, Mircea Djuvara, François Rigaux, Ion Deleanu, Tudor Drăganu etc. expressed their views on the principles of the rule of law, which persisted for several centuries. The rule of law is never a perfect reality and no country can claim to have achieved perfection, because the rule of law is not obtained easily, it is the joint effort of the state authorities, civil society, and all the citizens. José Manuel Durão Barroso stated that "The rule of law is the cornerstone of the European Union, there is no true democracy without the rule of law and without democracy the rule of law is just an instrument in the hand of the rulers". While the European Commissioner for Justice, Viviane Reding stated that "In parallel to the economic and financial crisis, we also have been confronted on several occasions with a true "rule of law" crisis. At the beginning of April 2014, in Innsbruck (Austria), was held the academic conference entitled "Strengthening the rule of law in Europe - from a common concept to mechanisms of implementation". On April 21, 2014, the European Parliament noted, according to Article 49 of the EU Treaty, Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia, as any European country can apply to become a member of the European Union, given that they realize the principles of democracy, the fundamentals of freedom, human and minority rights and ensure the rule of law. Thus, achieving the rule of law in Moldova was and will be a permanent and current task in the coming years.

The Judge plays a decisive role in promoting respect for human rights. His activity is governed by the fundamental principles of the "rule of law" concept. The principle of separation of powers is a principle that any democracy, that wants to be real, must necessarily take it into consideration and implement it. Delimitation of powers is, broadly speaking, a different jurisdiction to establish institutional authority, and to exclude other forms of mutual intrusion than those permitted by law. At European level, the criteria and conditions of the judicial domain, and the judges, receive a broader notion, more complex. The structure of today's European Union is based solely on the rules of law. Rule of law is ensured through creation of Community law that is independent and uniform for all Member States. To ensure judicial protection of individual rights conferred by Community law, transparency is indispensable to national procedural law. Therefore, the national legislation must be put in harmony with European law and the national legislator is obliged to respect the decisions of the EUCJ, which decided that, in principle, the conditions imposed by national law will not have to render virtually the rights conferred by Community law. Any judge, seized within its jurisdiction, is required to apply the provisions of Community law and protect rights which are conferred to individuals, leaving all provisions inapplicable, possibly contrary, the national law, either before or after the Community rule. European law clearly reinforces cultural and legal national judge. Community law isn't a foreign law, it is an outside law. This law is proper to each of our States as its national law, but it also has this feature to be at the same time a common value for all.

Ombudsman, unlike the court, cannot make binding decisions, but usually public authorities follow its recommendations, otherwise he may bring the case to the attention of politicians and the public by informing Parliament. The link between the two fundamental European institutions, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Ombudsman, may be defined as a strong direct link between the problems of EU citizens. Requests to each institution represent an interest of each petitioner, which is intended to be solved by matching laws with moral rules and general principles of law.

The treaties and the regulations of the Council of Europe offered greater protection to minors against the attacks on their lives and health. However, the effective implementation of this is carried out through national criminal laws. In the European countries, the criminal laws set certain infringements against the minor's life and health including aggravating offenses, which are committed by a certain person against minors. Some of them are similar, others, though, differ from one state to another, which consequently requires their unification to ensure a minimum of protection.

In the context of internationalisation the national issues regarding the restitution of nationalised immovable goods in different stages of history, the subject at hand, represents a pioneering analysis of a complex national reality. Recent practice of Romanian courts has revealed a delicate problem that is apparently the object of debate and resolve of the national and international academic environment. Through the analysis the author tackles the problem of discrimination that is committed by the national law that regulates the matter of restitution of goods that were abusively taken over by the state, from the point of view of the theoretician, as well as the practitioner, pointing out the necessity of direct cooperation with the European courts. The negative discrimination, resulting from the art. 36 of 18/1991 law, can be analysed as an objective and rational justification that would allow the direct practice of the European convention of human rights concerning the litigations about "Land Act" (Law no. 18/1991)

Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an essential reference to human rights and freedoms. Both the Declaration and the Constitution obliges authorities, especially justice and therefore constitutional justice to respect fundamental rights and freedoms, including those through which is ensured protection of personality's spiritual side. The right to a fair trial has a special place among the fundamental rights in a democratic society, whose level should be inherent in any system of law. The right to a fair trial in an independent and impartial court is recognised in customary international law so that those states that have not yet ratified the international instruments are also bound by law and the judicial system to adapt their legislation appropriately. The right to a fair trial has several components such as access to justice, a fair and public case in a reasonable time, examination of the case by an independent and impartial court, established by law, advertising delivery decisions. The right to be tried by an independent and impartial court is so elemental, exciting Human Rights Committee status as an "absolute right not bear any exception". The right to a fair trial also means a reasonable opportunity to expose any part of his case to the court in a manner that does not disadvantage the opposing party, which is achieved by ensuring its rights of defense. Parties have the right to be assisted by an attorney, elected or appointed by office. Realisation of the right to defense is ensured by the organisation and functioning of the judiciary, which is based on the principles of legality, equality of parties, gratuity, collegiality, publicity, immutability and the active role of the court. To enact a law the court as part of a fair trial takes into account the competence to hear the case, both materially and territorially. In this context, statutory legislation provisions are clear and precise, clearly delineating the powers of courts, the costs involved in the administration of justice. To understand and respect the provisions is of paramount importance in realisng the right - a prerequisite to the existence of balanced and harmonious society.

The internationalization of national constitutions includes an eventual unification of constitutional rules deemed necessary to intensify international relations. So, in a broader way it is invoked the impact of international law and international relations on constitutional law. The result of the internationalization of national rights is a progressive harmonization of concepts and legal rules. In the current state of international law, constitutions' internationalization corresponds a concrete impact of international law on constitutional norms. The current trend of constitutions is to regulate in a more accurate and comprehensive way the relations between the state and international law. International law does not require any particular form of the conclusion of international treaties. In intensification of international relations, international conventions and integration of states in international organizations, the Parliament carries important consequences for both on normative function and the control function. Such legislative activity is guided by international treaties concluded by the state. While the executive and the legislative are involved in the development of international law, the jurisdictional power intervenes to reconcile domestic and international legal norms. States do not devote supremacy of international law over their constitution. Because international treaties to be part of the national legal order is not enough that the procedure for concluding treaties to be respected. It is also necessary that treaties do not contravene fundamental state constitutional principles of human rights and the relationship between public authorities. The control of international treaties' constitutionality can be mandatory or optional. In the process of ratification of the treaty on EU European constitutional courts tend to create a similar design to establish the limits of European integration. In reality, the issue of constitutionality of international treaties control is a political issue and it is difficult to apply legal principles purely political matters. There are three categories of states in the aspect of national courts on constitutional regularity control concluding treaties.