1. Context. The social dimension of a state represents, unquestionably, the foundation of its very existence. As a subject, cause and mobile of the act of governing, society justifies the creation, implementation, maintenance and constant evolution of one of the largest known socio-political institutional structures – the state. As such, society consists of ‘a unitary and complex system of human interactions’ (Muraru & Tănăsescu, 2011, p. 1 sqq), which ‘can exist, develop and that can exercise its power only in and by the means of organised structures’ (ibid).

This article focuses on a comparative analysis, in the light of the principle of availability, of some civil procedural law institutions, particularly important in the economy of a proceeding for the parties involved. It shall consider the acts of disposition of the plaintiff and the defendant presented in an antithesis. The purpose of this paper is to present the advantages and disadvantages of each institution as well as the implications for the parties of a civil proceeding.

The present article aims to single out the legal implications of the situation in which a person decides to acquire a guard dog in order to protect himself/herself from possible threats. Staying alive is our basic daily task. Therefore, not surprisingly, humans resort to a multitude of mechanisms for protection in order to feel safe. The argumentation will be built by analysing a particular case that raises legal issues in the field of both criminal and civil liabilities in the Romanian legal system.

Introduction

A person who commits a crime must be held responsible for his or her actions if the crime is committed with a certain form of guilt, in an unjustified and illicit manner. Thus, criminal liability (i.e. being held responsible for an illegal behaviour that causes harm or damage to someone or something) is a legal consequence of committing criminal actions under certain conditions. But how can one identify these conditions, especially considering the fact that one’s responsibility does not eliminate liability nor reduces it? 

The aim of this article is to give an answer to this question from the perspective of criminal responsibility and the situation called actio libera in causa. 

Our Supporters

Lawyr.it Opportunities

Lawyr.it Masters Abroad

Lawyr.it Newsletter