IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The Contest Among The Decisions Of The Romanian Constitutional Court And The Decisions Of The Romanian High Court Of Cassation And Justice In The Recourse In The Interest Of Law

  • LUCIAN CHIRIAC

    (Associate professor PhD., “Petru Maior” University of Tîrgu-Mureº, Faculty of Economics, Law and Administrative Sciences, ROMANIA.)

This study raises a really important matter for the real functioning of the Romanian rule of law. Which of these two institutions - the Constitutional Court or the High Court of Cassation and Justice is called upon to solve a problem of law and the solution of which one can be applied in the practice of the courts? The study is based on a specific case, the legal conflict that arose from the uneven application of the constitutional provisions, and not only but also from the poor drafting of the Romanian Constitution in what concerns the limitation of competences regarding certain fundamental institutions for the existence of the rule of law.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.upm.ro/facultati_departamente/ea/RePEc/curentul_juridic/rcj11/recjurid112_1F.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation in its journal Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current.

Volume (Year): 45 (2011)
Issue (Month): (June)
Pages: 13-18

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:45:y:2011:p:13-18
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.upm.ro/facultati_departamente/ea/Email:


More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:45:y:2011:p:13-18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bogdan Voaidas)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.