Although the means to apply the mechanism of unpredictability is nowadays one of the most debated subjects in civil law, it is almost impossible not to be tackled in other domains, such as public law. Whereas the theory of contractual unpredictability had been born under the constraints of administrative jurisdiction, it became a lot more popular after its regulation in the Romanian Civil Code. There were numerous reasons to undertake this measure. After the financial crisis of 2008-2009, an institution that could balance the inequity between the parties’ rights and obligations – torn by an exceptional change of the circumstances – was demanded by many people who concluded different types of credit loans. The situation was new, but somehow foreseen. From the perspective of public law, even though there were few specific regulations, the jurisprudence elaborated some theories regarding the means of the harmonisation of economic and judicial realities.
According to the Romanian Civil Code, the obligation of confidentiality presents itself as a mutual obligation, regardless of the position of the parties sitting at the negotiation table. The legislative system has appreciated the protection of confidential information, which is required to be incorporated explicitly in a legal provision. This must be seen from a dual perspective, first the negative, where the holder of the confidential information is obliged not to disclose the information to third parties. The positive one establishes that the party which possesses confidential information must inform the other party of its nature. It has rightly been held that, regarding confidential information, ‘the parties seek the protection of their private interests, therefore they can abolish or restrict the sphere of its application’.
The Romanian Civil Code provides that part of the deceased’s estate shall be granted, even against his wish – manifested through donations or wills –, to a category of heirs called forced heirs (for the legal regime of forced heirship, see Articles 1.086 – 1.099 of the Romanian Civil Code, 2009). However, since this is effectively a limitation of a person’s possibility to freely dispose of his property and, as such, a limitation of the right to property, a question arises: is this limitation compatible with the right to respect for private property enshrined in Article 1 of Protocol no. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as ECHR)?
Despite being a common law creation, ‘drag along’ and ‘tag along’ clauses have gradually come into practice in Romania. Due to the recent years’ strong economic progress and the growth of some economic sectors (e.g. the IT market) institutional investors, such as venture capital investors, private equity investors, even business angels (individual investors who provide capital for businesses) have appeared. For them an exit from their investment is particularly important. There are many ways to withdraw from an investment, but this article will focus on the drag along and tag along clauses. These clauses are considered universally valid, regardless of jurisdiction and I will try to determine how they fit into the Romanian legal system.
1. The problem and a proposed solution
One of the most significant outcomes of the armed conflict in Ukraine is the influx of displaced citizens from the Donbass region and the Crimean Peninsula. Internally displaced persons (IDPs) are persons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to flee or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalised violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognised state border (Art. 2/Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, Representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, 1998).
In the present time, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) play an important role in international economic relations. They affect the international system by monitoring state performance or advocating new policy agendas. The work of NGOs focuses on a variety of fields, e.g. economy, human rights, development, and the environment. Their activities have also found a prominent place in the WTO (World Trade Organisation) and in the United Nations system. The recognition of NGO’s de facto (factual) influence in international relations and the absence of international regulation for their creation and activity are the reasons why it is particularly important to establish their de iure (legal) status in international economic law, including their rights and obligations. This is the main objective of this short paper.
In recent years, while approaching Christmas, controversies about secularism were raised in some European countries. In Belgium, for example, the Nativity scene was removed from the Holsbeek Town hall (a small town near Brussels) under the pressure of lay activists in 2016. In 2017, some schools decided to remove the cross on the mitre of Saint Nicholas who is celebrated on December 6 as patron saint of schoolchildren. In France, where secularism is embedded in the Constitution, the debate was even deeper and the question of whether Nativity scenes should be prohibited in public spaces was brought to the courts. The two decisions issued by the French Council of State on November 9, 2016 did not close the debate but have been crucial in the determination of ‘legal’ and ‘illegal’ Nativity scenes.
“Martial law does not mean declaring war to Russia. It is going to be introduced for defence purposes.” – Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko declared on 26 November 2018 in the National Security and Defence Council in Ukraine (BBC News, 2018). The proposition was to be submitted to the Ukrainian Parliament on the same day for discussion and voting, which would prove to be implemented successfully. Such a declaration and measure may seem, at first glance, relatively extreme, controversial or unprecedented, considering past situations when it was applied. The present article analyses the ongoing conflict – be it direct or sometimes indirect – between a world power, the Russian Federation, and an ex-communist state, Ukraine.
In 2018, the World celebrates 70 years since Eleanor Roosevelt elevated the freshly signed Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR from now on). Shortly after the atrocities of the Second World War, this document was considered a milestone in the history of humanity. Since then, the document - albeit not having a binding force on governments – has helped in the creation of other human rights declarations, constitutions, and other laws. The document faces much criticism, such as its western bias, but the praises are highly outweighing the criticism. To this day, this is the United Nation’s most important document.
‘Genome editing is editing society’
Technology got us to the point where, based on our behaviour, we can predict that in just a few decades our planet will face an environmental crisis. Nowadays it is not unusual to grow crops on a large scale in areas where life cannot usually be sustained. We improved most of the contingencies that surround us in order to make life better.
But what about our own improvement, what about the influence of technology in genetic modification? Can we use it regardless of the ethical implications, or does our philosophy hinder the advancement in this field? The aim of this article is to raise a moral quandary by turning the spotlight on the libertarian view on whether we should or should not use technologies like CRISPR and cas-9 to interfere with how the nature designs us.
Medical law is a developing field of law, which means that there is not much theory nor research done on the topic. All medical errors for which a doctor is imputable can be considered a part of the much wider known term of “malpractice”. There is no such thing as a clear delimitation between civil liability and criminal medical liability, both being considered part of the larger notion of malpractice. Medical malpractice is defined in Romania (Law 95/2006) in accordance with the medical system reform concerning medical misconduct as being “a vocational error committed during the medical or medical-pharmaceutical practice, generating damage towards the patient.
The pharmaceutical industry has deeply contributed to human welfare. Indeed, new drug enforcement has played a vital role in increasing longevity and enhancing the quality of life. For this reason, issues of justice are particularly sharp, especially concerning the accessibility of drugs to the people who desperately need them.
The question that is raised is whether the drug market should be completely free or be subject to state intervention and if the answer to the question is the second option, it is then necessary to analyse which is the most efficient and right way to intervene. This article focuses on the role of intellectual property rights and patents in the development and accessibility of new pharmaceuticals.