Search

The article tries to answer a very important problem faced by legal practitioners of all times, namely the problem of the relationship between equity and law. The perspective of a judge on this aspect is complemented by that of prestigious authors who have reflected on the most appropriate way of applying the law. In the article they are analyzed two major currents of interpretation of legal norms, which are still facing each other in the theory of law, namely textualism and purposivism, the first current claiming that the interpretation of the legal norms must be done exclusively on the basis of the text of the law, and the second that the legislator's intention or purpose must also be taken into account. It is also emphasized the risk that, through the interpretation of the law, judges will impose their views on state policy. Only equity can protect us from this risk, because it prevents arbitrariness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The application of European Union law in criminal matters has raised numerous discussions in domestic law. The priority application of European Union law raised the issue of guaranteeing fundamental human rights and freedoms in the event that the internal standard is higher than the European Union standard. The jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union has established in numerous cases the priority nature of European Union law over domestic law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The modified version of art. 121-3 of the French Criminal Code introduces a hierarchy of the nonintentional forms of guilt according to seriousness. From the perspective of the French legislator, this hierarchy would be the following: deliberate negligence (art. 121-3 para. 2), simple negligence - carelessness, imprudence - (art. 121-3 para. 3) and breaking a duty of care or protection (art. 121-3 para. 4). In the Italian Criminal Code only the conscious negligence is defined, whereas the simple negligence is not defined, but merely exemplified. Thus, article 43 para. 1 states that "There is an offence committed with negligence whenever the result, even though foreseen, is not desired by the agent and occurs because of carelessness, imprudence, lack of skill, or failure to observe laws, regulations, orders or instructions". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although in German and in Spanish legal systems there are no express provisions with regard to the criminal negligence (culpa), this has not hindered the legal doctrine and jurisprudence to thoroughly analyse this form of guilt. This made it possible to qualify as intentional offences some deeds which in our legal system are considered to be committed with conscious negligence (involving foresight). The difficulty to distinguish between indirect intention (dolus eventualis) and conscious negligence (luxuria) has nonetheless determined Spanish courts to ask the legislator to provide a clear definition of indirect intention, which could be an additional argument with respect to the weaknesses entailed by such a legal approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under the old Code of Criminal Procedure, there has been no serious debate about the nature of the 5-day time limit within which the prosecutor must submit a proposal to extend the preventive arrest measure and because most courts have considered it to be a recommendation, there was no question regarding its calculation. The discussions focused on the peremptory or the recommandation nature of the term and the authors did not rule on the legal nature of the term in order to establish whether it was a procedural term or a substantive term. If we take into account all these views on the interest protected by the legislator by establishing the term in question, according to which the main reason for it is to protect the freedom of the person, we should consider it a substantive term, as it protects an extra-procedural interest and not a procedural one. In this case, the 5-day period should be calculated on full days, and if it expired on a non-working day, it would not be prolonged until the first business day. However, by Decision no. 20/2017 pronounced following the promotion of an appeal in the interest of the law, the High Court of Cassation and Justice has declared binding: "...in the interpretation and uniform application of the provisions of art. 235 para. (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stipulates that: The 5-day period provided for in Article 235 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code shall be calculated according to art. 269 para. (1), (2) and (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In art. 16 paragraph (1) - (4), the new Romanian Criminal Code refers to some psychological processes, such as representation and willpower, which lead us to believe that the psychological theory of guilt has been preserved, being also mentioned in art. 19 in the old Criminal code. This theory of guilt has known many tendencies over time, entering our doctrine and legislation as the theory of representation. According to this theory when someone wants to do a certain physical act he foresees the consequences of that act, meaning that in his mind he has the representation (the image) of the natural consequences following that activity, and this representation of the result, the finality of the willful activity, is an act of conscience accompanying the act of will. These are reference points to be taken into consideration when the judiciaries analyze the criminal guilt whenever an offence has been committed under the criminal law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]