Suchergebnisse

The legal architecture of the EU is considered to be sui generis and like any other hybrid system, the process of integration and interaction with the older instruments of the member-states can sometimes become difficult. This article investigates the interventionist tendencies of the Bundesverfassungsgericht in EU development and the reactions of the EU Court of Justice. The main finding is that the German Court often acts as a balance setter in the process of EU integration. The research introduces the debate of the national states' legal resistance to integration and highlights the changes brought in this respect by the Treaties of Maastricht and Lisbon.

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 preliminary ruling procedure is a useful tool that, over time, allowed the national courts to participate to the application of European Union law and contributed to this law system evolution. Our study reveals that the procedure is useful for both the national court and the litigant parties, as it clarifies both categories of participants on how should be applied the law of the European Union. However, the preliminary ruling procedure is subject to specific rules, very well systematized in the Recommendations to national courts and tribunals in relation to the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings, a document issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union itself. Ignoring these recommendations led to the rejection, as inadmissible, of certain requests for a preliminary ruling, and this is a situation that should be avoided in the future.

Referral to the CJEU for the pronouncement of preliminary rulings regarding the interpretation of European Union law cannot have a purely theoretical purpose (e.g. the Court Ordinance of October 7, 2013 in case C-82/13) but a necessarily practical one, such as to allow the national court to resolve the specific dispute with which it is vested. Therefore, knowledge of the judicial decisions pronounced by the national courts after receiving the answer to the preliminary question from the CJEU is very important to evaluate the implications of the CJEU jurisprudence in the law of the member states and the effectiveness of the dialogue between it and the national courts. Next, the decisions of the courts in Romania are presented in some cases in which the CJEU was referred with preliminary questions, respectively those that were resolved in the cases registered on its roll with no. C-62/19, C 354/18 and C 644/19.

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.

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 article presents the judgment delivered by the European Court of Human Rights of 5 March 2020 in GROBELNY v. Poland, by which the Court found that Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights had been infringed following the rejection by national courts of the applicant's claim for compensation equal to the invalidity pension which he was unlawfully deprived of by applying the res judicata principle, despite the existence of relevant and sufficient grounds for departing from that principle, namely the fact that the applicant's deprivation of pension rights was the consequence of a manifest error attributable to the public authority, found as such by the court in the second dispute. The Court held that, in this way, the national authorities had failed to ensure compliance with the principles of social justice and fairness or good governance and that the burden to which the applicant was subject was disproportionate, since he was required to bear the consequences of the errors attributable to the public authorities on his own, even though he did not have any other legal means to compensate for the damage. The article also contains an analysis by the author of the ECtHR ruling.

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 structural-functional features of the European political system are analyzed. The author correlates the structure and the functions of the national political system with the functionality of the European supra-national structures. The efficiency of the decision making process and the functionality of any type of political system is influenced by the level of political culture and the degree of maturity of the political actors. The need to correlate interests of different states: EU members, candidates or those in process to adhere to the EU, determines the supra-national structures: European Council, European Union Council, European Parliament, EU Court of Justice, EU Court of Accounts, European Central Bank to honor honestly and responsibly their functions, respecting democratic principles of political communication, of cooperation and co-work. In conclusion, the author states that the European political system is functional, efficient, viable due to the capacity of institutions to ensure a dynamic stability both at community level and national one. The fact that at the moment the European Union is an international political actor with legal status and its components (Member States) that share the same rights and obligations represents a unique experience, interesting for the contemporary political theory.

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)

Actuellement nombreuses compagnies provenants des pays développés réexaminent la géographie de l'«outsourcing» (externalisation). La focalisation durable sur la productivité, l'efficience opérationnelle et la posibilité d'une future extension de l'emplacement, l'emportent sur la diminution de coûts à court terme. L'arrivée des grandes STN (sociétés transnationales) dans les pays de l'Europe Centrale et de l'Est marque le début d'une tendance ample, qui tient non seulement des opportunités de faire économie à long terme, mais aussi d'une possible perspective pour ces pays de devenir leaders dans l'attirance des investissements.

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.

An insightful look through the history of punishment and prisons offers a new perspective on the changes that have been undergone or would occur in the Romanian penitentiary system. In the last instance the Romanian punishment and prisons have not displayed the same functions from their origin till now. The study of documents, old chronics and writings of various historians unveil huge differences in thinking the punishment and the role of prison in different historic ages. There were times when the prisons were situated either in the center of society (in country's Principe or boyars' courts) or times when they were placed at society's periphery. The execution was public or hidden. A trip in the history of the Romanian detention system opens a wide window toward the future of this social system.

Mediation is first and foremost an alternative to the justice that solves amicably a conflict between the parties to the conflict. Mediation has its origin in antiquity. It is found in the Justinian Codification. Our ancestors have preserved the institution of mediation in feudalism, and in modern times only in rural areas. At the present stage, the mediation procedure has grown in most European countries. The advantages of out-of-court mediation are: shorter duration, flexibility of the mediation procedure, parties can identify and adopt their own solutions. Among the disadvantages we mention: the non-binding character of the decisions, the inaccurate decisions, there is no guarantee of a successful solution. Specifically, the disadvantages of mediation have served as grounds for some states, including Moldova, to regulate the mandatory mediation for some categories of cases. This is how Italy and Romania went.