Suchergebnisse

The development of international online commerce has led to the shift of disputes arising mainly from electronic contracts in the online environment (Online Dispute Resolution, ODR).International commercial arbitration could not be an exception to this development.The digital foreign arbitral award rendered following an online arbitration (e-arbitration) may be enforced in case of voluntary non-enforcement on the territory of a foreign state, following the recognition and enforcement procedure. One of the reasons that the party opposed to the digital arbitral award may invoke to block this procedure is the lack of formal validity of the arbitration agreement concluded by electronic means. This article aims to examine the regulatory framework within which a state court will examine the formal validity of the digital arbitration agreement and the extent to which this ground for refusal of recognition can be found to be well-founded.

The jurisdiction regulation applicable in the EU Member States has the vocation to
govern all civil and commercial legal matters, in the absence of express limitations provided in
its content. In addition to the general rule establishing the jurisdiction to settle a specific case
with internationality elements in favor of the courts of the defendant's domicile, the
Regulation also sets out a number of other special provisions, including, among others,
litigation arising out of consumer contracts. Special rules of jurisdiction have been set out in
this matter, in order to protect the consumer, who is considered the weaker part of the contract
from an economic and informational point of view. Exceptions to these special jurisdictional
rules have been also provided, given the significantly closer balance found in certain contracts
between the rights and obligations of the signatory parties, professional (economic operator)
and consumer.
This article aims to address the issue of the derogation from the special rules of
competence established in favor of consumers and, in particular, the interplay between these
derogations and the Directive on unfair terms in consumer contracts.

This study aims to answer the question whether Christian Orthodoxy can inspire political movements. In so doing we start from the political theories of modernity where the link between Christianity and democracy is central. Our result sounds unexpected: interaction between Orthodoxy and democracy seems to not have a perspective. It is too late for it since most political movements in post-communism do not have the religious identity of their members as criterion. The situation was not different before. As an example the effort of the orthodox theologians and laymen in Romania before the outbreak of the Second World War is quoted here. Almost without an exception all focused and restricted their interest on the question of the nation. Therein we see the principal reason for the above postulated perspective of an orthodox political doctrine until now. On the European level the situation looks also no better. Even the parties, which attribute themselves the Christian values, have at present large difficulties to convey their message. It remains only to hope that the political actors rediscover the social and actively support the Christian ethics in the public area. Only so can democracy be regarded as one of the most important binding forces also under the Christians.

In the conservative imaginary, at least in the cases of Constantin N. Brăiloiu and Alexandru N. Lahovary, France was not deemed a functioning political model (i.e., a political or constitutional regime) that Romania should have followed. Compared with the English political model (or rather with the Anglo-Saxon one, since the reference sometimes included the United States of America) and with the Belgian regime, France was certainly a less favoured option. However, without exception and despite all discursive artifice, in the perspective of these two politicians, who were evidently Francophile, both by education and by cultural affinities, France undeniably remained a landmark of civilization or administrative and economic efficiency, and sometimes a beacon of legal inspiration. It must be said that the latter perception was in no way related to Constantin N. Brăiloiu and Alexandru N. Lahovary's conservative convictions. It was commonplace in the local cultural imaginary, which, regardless of one's political, social or cultural affiliation, repeated the encomiastic mantra dedicated to imperial France, to whom the Romanians were convinced that they owed the existence of their nation. In fact, one should not overlook another typical belief of this political imaginary, which is illustrated in our case by Alexandru N. Lahovary: the Romanian politicians were persuaded that the ideals included in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen were exclusively due to the France of 1789.

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.