IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pmu/cjurid/v41y2010p148-154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Legal Nature Of The Infringement Report

Author

Listed:
  • Eugenia IOVANAS

    (PhD., "Aurel Vlaicu" University of Arad, Romania)

Abstract

Regarding the probative force of the infringement report in the trial instances’ legal maxim there have been framed two different opinions that have found a unitary rendition over the legal problem submitted to the debate. According to the solution adopted by ECHR in the cause Anghel vs. Romania, the report didn’t have the same probative force that previously had, that is the situation of its appeal on the complaint, such that for the re-establishment of the equality of the juridical procedures that the parties have in their hands within the started legal procedure is necessary that this start from the presumed innocence premise in favor of the claimant, with the consequence of the necessity for the court to prove – inclusively the claimant’s guilt. The author of the work considers that in the situation that the report has been signed with objections by the offender, at the moment of the fact’s ascertainment comes to the ascertaining agent, the infringement report is governed by the legal premise and the premise of absolute solidity.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugenia IOVANAS, 2010. "The Legal Nature Of The Infringement Report," Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current, Le Courant Juridique, Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation, vol. 41, pages 148-154, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:41:y:2010:p:148-154
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.upm.ro/facultati_departamente/ea/RePEc/curentul_juridic/rcj10/recjurid102_14F.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sanction report; ECHR in the cause Anghel vs. Romania; presumed innocence; legal premise;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:41:y:2010:p:148-154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bogdan Voaidas (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feuttro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.