Search

The European Union is a unique political and legal construct. The role it plays in developing and safeguarding the fundamental values and principles underpinning democracy and the rule of law is immense for every Member State. Unfortunately, the challenges it has had to face in recent years have multiplied and intensified: from the Covid-19 pandemic to economic crises, migration, EU-scepticism, and the war in Ukraine. The European decision-makers have had to respond quickly to all these crises with concrete and viable solutions. At the end of the upcoming election, we will see whether they succeeded or not in dealing with all the crises. The 2024 European elections will be opening a new page in the history of the European democracy. They elections will be a test, both for those who will stand as candidates and for the European citizens who will vote. For the Union and its citizens, „the achievement of peace", which is one of the key objectives in Robert Schuman's Declaration2, remains to be fulfilled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon increase both the role of the European Parliament and the national parliaments in the decision-making mechanism of the European Union. This process, by which greater importance is given to the competences of the European Parliament, is viewed, both by Eurosceptic, but also by those who support the theory of the dissolution of the concept of sovereignty in the process of European integration, through the lens of scenarios inconsistent with legal reality. The present study aims to argue, starting from the principles of organization and operation of the European Union, as they are codified by the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon, that the integration process not only does not diminish the importance of national parliaments, but brings nuances and advances regulations to ensure efficient and effective democratic control in the European integration process and also to propose appropriate solutions to overcome said issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The interest in studying the protection of personal data in the criminal trial is developing and will continue as no references have been made or studied over the years except for the protection of personal data in general, not also in the criminal trial, and the emergence of the new legislative framework of the EU, by adopting EU Regulation No 679/2016 and EU Directive No 680/2016, requires new changes to be made and created in the field of criminal trial, in order to fully ensure the protection of personal data of the parties. EU Regulation 679/2016 on data protection, which has been applied in Romania since 25 May 2018, provides an updated legal framework, based on the responsibility for data protection. It aims to create a unified framework for the protection of personal data of the EU citizens, granting them more rights and control facilities than they previously had over their own data and, therefore, more obligations and responsibilities for the organizations that manage the data. There are mainly two aspects of the regulation: the protection of the rights of the persons concerned and the confidentiality of their data. Both aspects have technological implications. In order to cope with the complexity of the types of threats regarding information security and because information security is permanent, an information security management system must be established, implemented and maintained, focusing on the three concepts of information: security/privacy, integrity and availability. EU Regulation 679/2016 is a big step forward in personal data protection legislation. By replacing Directive 95/46/CE, a uniform legislative framework was ensured throughout the EU and beyond, considered less vulnerable to the interpretations of the member states. It brings clear benefits by emphasizing the importance of maintaining limited access to personal data, as well as the importance of personal data in preserving personal integrity and fundamental freedoms. Personal data, although it has and had a fabulous economic potential, could be exploited too easily, which is why the EU wanted to prevent possible abuses by establishing a more restrictive legislative framework. Many data processors have had to revise their consent collection policies and thus the users have had more control over their personal data. Thus it was created the possibility, on the one hand, for citizens to check the way personal data is collected and used, and, on the other hand, for the authorities to control and prevent their use (we consider them of defence for the proper functioning within the criminal prosecution activities). While EU Regulation 679/2016 replaces Directive No 46/1995/CE, the data processing in the segment of crime prevention, criminal prosecution and execution of criminal sanctions is included in Directive (EU) 2016/680 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA, in force since May 2016, which has as its regulatory object the protection of natural persons regarding the processing of personal data by the competent authorities for the purpose of preventing, detecting, investigating or prosecuting offences or of executing the penalties and regarding the free circulation of this data. In this sense, special attention must be paid to the connection of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code with the new legislative framework, Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA and the General Regulation 2016/679 EU of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and the free movement of such data and the repeal of Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), as they have brought improvements with regard to the regulatory norms and within the application of criminal procedure. The Criminal Procedure Codes, from Romania and the Republic of Moldova, do not expressly provide for the application of the protection of personal data of the parties in the trial, there being shortcomings that can be taken advantage of. In this sense, appropriate technical and organizational measures for the implementation of data protection principles must be implemented, at the same time with the application of the criminal procedure. The application of criminal procedures must also be designed and built taking into account the principles of the regulations in force on the protection of personal data and must provide guarantees for data protection (for example, pseudonymization or anonymization where appropriate), but also to use the highest possible privacy settings by default. We believe that the existence of personal data protection legislation, EU Regulation 679/2016 and EU Directive 680/2016, without clear application rules in the field of criminal procedure, which must fully ensure the protection of the personal data of parties, is not a sufficient one and, therefore, does not correspond to the expectations of a democratic society, which is why this presentation will be a presentation on the identification and implementation of some procedural guarantees for the protection of personal data in the evidentiary procedures for which the rules of criminal procedure admit interferences in the private life. Objectives: - arguing the need to study the identification and implementation of some procedural guarantees for the protection of personal data within the evidentiary procedures for which the rules of criminal procedure admit intrusions into private life; - the analysis of the rules provided by the Criminal Procedure Code of Romania and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Moldova regarding the study in question; - the identification of the circumstances of violations within the evidentiary procedures of the personal data of the parties, with examples also from the case law. The research results and the theoretical and practical implications of the study. It represents an attempt to analyze the positive and critical aspects, the formulation of the own ideas regarding the identification of some procedural guarantees for the protection of personal data within the evidentiary procedures for which the rules of criminal procedure admit interferences in the private life. On the other hand, practical aspects of the ECHR case law related to violations of the protection of personal data in the criminal trial of the parties were addressed, in order to emphasize its particularities in practice to the legal bodies. The study carried out in this way allows to establish the directions and trends of the procedural-criminal policy promoted in Romania and the Republic of Moldova on the line of ensuring and realizing the right to the protection of personal data within the evidentiary procedures. The theoretical, normative and empirical material was used in the elaboration of this article. Likewise, the research of the respective subject is possible by applying several methods of scientific investigation specific to the theory: the logical method, the method of comparative analysis, the analytical method, the method of sociological research etc. The examination and analysis of the normative framework in the Republic of Moldova and Romania is aimed at the compliance and the implementation of some procedural guarantees for the protection of personal data within the evidentiary procedures for which the norms of criminal procedure allow interferences in the private life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change is at the top of the nine 'planetary boundaries' identified by scientists as biophysical thresholds, frontiers that cannot be crossed to avoid brutal, non-linear, potentially catastrophic and largely unpredictable environmental change. They represent for the relevant global response both interlinked strategic objectives and concrete measures and actions of public policy and legal regulation within the framework of global environmental governance. Already enjoying a representative international legal regime, climate change is already developing and has important links with other 'planetary boundaries', such as the ozone layer, ocean acidity, biodiversity loss or atmospheric aerosol pollution, and is stimulating the affirmation of appropriate legal rules and standards for them too. In addition, the European Parliament's proposal for the elaboration and adoption of an international agreement on planetary boundaries (2021) raises important legalpolitical issues of structuring an integrated governance of matter, marking aspects of the transition to international law of the Anthropocene. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Româna de Dreptul Muncii is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The 2024 European elections are at the corner, and most probably they will be done in a turmoil context, due to the various national, transnational, and also global overwhelming crises. Wanting to measure citizens' (mis)trust in the EU institutions, the European Parliament, quite recently, made public the results of the newest Eurobarometer titled "One year before the European Elections". After reviewing these data, I considered it also useful to explore, in a genealogical way, the condition of being together, assumed by the membership of the EU member states. I found out that although "togetherness" is overuse during the not yet a century old history of the EU the empirical reality it calls is always different, a circumstantial one, seldom shared in full. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Journal of Intellectual Property Law / Revista Română de Dreptul Proprietăţii Intelectuale is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Româna de Dreptul Muncii is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept European is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Româna de Dreptul Muncii is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Journal of Intellectual Property Law / Revista Română de Dreptul Proprietăţii Intelectuale is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the case of the debate by the Romanian notary public of a succession with an element of extraneity, in which the registered shares of a limited liability company are subject to succession, the successional devolution will be carried out according to the law applicable to the succession (lex successionis). The point of connection for the lex successionis is the last habitual residence of the natural person, but this person can choose the law applicable to the succession, his national law. According to the lex successionis, there will be established the heirs, but they will not automatically become associates in the limited liability company. The acquisition of the status of associate will be carried out according to the provisions of the law governing the organic status of the legal person (lex societatis), being a matter which concerns the functioning of the company, not the transmission by succession of the registered shares, which operates anyway, but an effect of devolution. The two laws may belong to different national systems of law. In the case of the application of the Romanian law, we intended to find out possible controversial aspects, presenting the doctrinal interpretations or the judicial practice ones and even trying to formulate some proposals de lege ferenda. We also tried to make a comparison with the material French corporate law, for the hypothesis in which de cujus would have registered shares in a limited liability company of French nationality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Strategic Universe Journal / Univers Strategic is the property of Dimitrie Cantemir Christian University, Institute for Security Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present research intends to analyze the issue of certification of the European Enforcement Orders from the perspective of the regulation provided for in Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims, from the perspective of the provisions of the Romanian Civil Procedure Code and also from the perspective of recent European and national case law in the matter. Therefore, the study aims to analyze the object, the scope of application, as well as the certification conditions of the European Enforcement Orders. In order to elaborate the study, there will be analyzed with priority the current European and national legislative provisions, the specialized doctrine, and also the relevant case law in the matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The presentation is an update of the aspects specific to the connection/adoption of the Romanian legislation of the field to that of the EU, respectively EU Regulation 2019/6, of the EU Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018, regarding veterinary medicinal products, where they have treated Article 6: Submission of applications for marketing authorizations; Art. 46: Scope of the marketing authorization granted by national procedure, Art. 47: National procedure for granting marketing authorization. It also presents the possible advantages of a national legislative procedure as well as proposals to ease the process of changing the conditions of authorization and variations that require evaluation, as a means of advising small and medium enterprises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Româna de Dreptul Muncii is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Review of Private Law / Revista Română de Drept Privat is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Assuming the objectives of the Paris Agreement (2015) and its role as a global leader in promoting the global response to the challenges of climate change, the EU has adopted in the past years a complex package of policies, strategies, and rulings regarding the creation of a new vision and the establishment of the appropriate juridical and institutional framework for the European action in the field. After the Resolution of the European Parliament of November 28th, 2019, which declared a "climate and environmental emergency", the European Commission has launched, on the following December 11th, the European Green Deal, and for its enforcement over 50 key actions, all involving a new "legal package" including revisions of existing regulations and adopting new ones. In this context, the Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of June 30th, 2021, establishes the framework for climate neutrality and for its development were announced, on the following July 14th, the first 13 foreshadowed regulations. The Regulation (the European climate law) makes compulsory objectives such as reaching climate neutrality by 2050, intermediary objectives such as the reduction of GHG emissions by 2030 and 2040, the adaptation establishing constant revisions and the suitable mechanism, it institutes the involvement of the European Scientific Consulting Council, and revises Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 on the energy union, thus establishing the basis for a new climate legal pack. In the meantime, the entire legal order of the EU becomes more open towards the eco-climatic problematic, favors the creation of the EU climate law and, on the one hand, generates adequate developments in the internal legal systems of the member states, while on the other hand, by the power of example and the interaction of legal systems, it influences the world climate law. By its decisions (the Declaration on Forests, the Global Pact for Methane, and the technical and procedural regulations) the COP26 (Glasgow, Scotland) contributes to the progress of the enforcement of the Paris Agreement, it expresses the increased contribution of the EU to the global ecological and climate reaction, and positively influences the evolution of the legal framework in the field. Thus, the conceptual and regulatory founding of a legal edifice specific to climate are being born. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

By adopting the EU Regulation No.848 / 2015 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20.05.2015 on insolvency proceedings and improving and improving the cross-border insolvency provisions. This regulation represents an improvement over the old 1346/2000, in addition to the regulation number 848/2015 and also the Union directive 1023/2019 on restructuring and insolvency, in the former regulation the insolvency of the groups of companies is not regulated. Groups of companies are entities that often act cross-border in relations with elements of foreignness. These reports are usually valid in several systems of law, the element of strangeness being not a distinct element of the legal report next to subjects, content and object, nevertheless entering into their componance. The insolvency proceedings applicable to the members of a group of companies, require cooperation and communication. The forms of cooperation are between insolvency practitioners, between courts and between insolvency practitioners and courts. Thus a distinct phenomenon can be realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Journal of Intellectual Property Law / Revista Română de Dreptul Proprietăţii Intelectuale is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The climate dispute, developed explosively in the last decade, has had a first experience also at the level of EU law through People's Climate Case (2018) in which 10 families and a civic association have brought an action before the EU Tribunal against the European Parliament and the European Commission for the insufficiency of the objectives assumed in the matter of climate changes. It was required the cancellation of several European Union legislative texts in the clime package and a compensation for the prejudice claimed to be incurred in this context. By the Ordinance of 8 May 2019, the action was dismissed as inadmissible, as the conditions of Article 263 (4) TFEU were not met, whereas there had been challenged legislative texts which did not concern and did not affect the applicants individually. The case law thus created leads to conclusions notable for the climate justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Româna de Dreptul Muncii is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Political parties see the European elections as an intermediate assessment of the balance of forces between the general elections or before the presidential elections. Connecting to the European agenda is still difficult, but less and less due to lack of understanding of the stakes. Eurobarometers, however, show that Romanians are pursuing the same priorities as those in other Member States, although some are still unresolved despite massive European funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Romania, the participation in the 2019 European Parliament elections was close to the European average, a visible progress compared to 2014. The vote confirmed the tendency to return to a more balanced multipartism, and PSD lost the first place. PNL would probably have been satisfied with a second place, while for USR PLUS it was a great performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since joining the European Union in 2007, Romania has organized four editions of the elections for the European Parliament. The article provides to the scholars the relevant electoral data on the four European Parliamentary elections, underlining the particularities of the elections of May 26, 2019. It contains electoral statistics that can draw a general picture on the elections for the European Parliament in Romania. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In spite of all the reforms from 1979 to the present day, the European elections are mainly elections in which the national issues fagocate the supranational character and downplay the importance of the elections vis-à-vis those concerning the national institutions. In addition, we do not have a European demos and without this demos it is hard to imagine a radical change. In Romania, the elections of May 2019 are somewhat like a referendum for or against the PSD government agenda more than an election related to European issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Law no. 8/1996 on copyright and related rights was recently amended and supplemented by the Law no. 15/2019. This legislative event was determined by the necessity to transpose in the Romanian legislation the provisions of the Directive (EU) 2017/1564 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 September 2017 on certain permitted uses of certain works and other subject matter protected by copyright and related rights for the benefit of persons who are blind, visually impaired or otherwise print-disabledand amending Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. In essence, in Law no. 8/1996, were introducedart. 351 and art. 352, which regulates the conditions under which the reproduction, communication to the public, making available to the public, broadcasting and lending of a work or other subject matter for the benefit of persons who are blind, visually impaired or otherwise print-disabled, is permitted without the consent of the rightholder of any copyright or related rightand without payment. The other amendments and additions to the Law no. 8/1996 only serve to adjust some provisions of this law to the new rules introduced by art. 351 si art. 352. In this situation also, the Romanian legislator made a “mot a mot transposition" of the provisions of the European legislation, without being concerned about their compatibility with other internal regulations regardingthe legal protection of intellectual creation. Inevitably, such a manner of transposition generates misunderstandings between the various provisions of the Law no. 8/1996 and even between the provisions of this law and other domestic laws, which generates sources for various doctrinal and jurisprudential interpretations. This study, makes both the analysis of the new regulations and the argumentation of some de lege ferendaproposals in order to remove some controversial legal issues related to the new legal provisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The dilemma on the bicameralism or unicameralism of the EC/EU legislator has existed for a long time. Not a few times, given the name of Parliament, operating with relative similarities regarding the states as subjects of international law, it was considered that it was and remained the legislature of the EC/EU. Over time, primary law and practice were likely to clarify things. Thus, at the beginnings of the Community construction, the Council acted as genuine supreme legislator, which had been gradually joined, as an institution of political control, consultation, cooperation and co-decision, by the European Parliament, so that currently the two institutions are equally involved in the legislative process of a two-chamber system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the 2007 integration of Romania in the European Union, three elections took place, in order to select the representatives of this country in the European Parliament. The current article has two main objectives: to test the main theories regarding the EP elections, mainly the second order elections one (a) and to look for some explanations for the particular outcome of the Romanian EP electoral results (b). Despite some particularities, one may notice that the European elections in Romania do not produce results that are spectacularly different from those in the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Government Emergency Ordinance no. 93/2012 under which the Financial Supervisory Authority was established, has been amended and supplemented by other Emergency Ordinances mainly intended for the enforcement of the European rules in the matter. The main legislative amendments entered by Law no. 113/2013 on the approval of the Emergency Ordinance no. 93/2013, by the Emergency Ordinance no. 78/2013 and by the Emergency Ordinance no. 94/2013 have been examined. Thus, a new text has been introduced which sets forth that the Financial Supervisory Authority is the relevant authority at the national level for enforcing and following up the observance of the regulations directly applicable issued in the territory of the European Union, as well as for the transposition and enforcement in the domestic law of those provisions issued by the EU Council, EU Parliament, European Commission, as well as by other European authorities. Other amendments look at the assimilation, in certain issues, of the Bylaws of the Financial Supervisory Authority with the Bylaws of the National Bank of Romania. At the same time, the supplements of the original provisions are made clear, having as subject matter the incompatibilities and the conflict of interests amongst the members of the Financial Supervisory Authority Council, etc. Finally, it is considered that the amendments and the supplements of the original texts of the Emergency Ordinance no. 93/2012 managed to the largest extent, to transpose the European rules in the matter and at the same time, the legislative and institutional commitments have been taken into consideration, which the Financial Supervisory Authority assumed in relation to the European Commission and the International Monetary Fund, in order to harmonize them with the best international practices. On the other hand, any reservations are expressed in relation to the adoption of any successive emergency ordinances with amending or supplementing functions of the provisions of the original emergency ordinance regulating the organization of an authority. One considers that is necessary to find any solutions in order to provide a certain legislative stability, to this end proposing a harder observance and strict application of the legal technique requirements set forth by the Law no. 24/2000, as republished. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept European is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Pandectele Române is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept European is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Review of Private Law / Revista Română de Drept Privat is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The European Parliament is the voice of united nations in the European Union, being constituted by free, direct and democratic. Uses and the European Parliament is the institution that provides the widest representation of European citizens. The role and importance of the European Parliament involves a high degree of responsibility of MEPs, they benefit from a wide range of rights and privileges in the exercise of their functions in good condition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Română de Drept European is the property of Wolters Kluwer Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)