IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sja/journl/v12y2023i1p99-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Request for Revision Declared Inadmissible in Principle, after the Constitutional Court Admitted the Exception of Unconstitutionality Invoked in That Case. Consequences in Terms of the Right of Access to the Court

Author

Listed:
  • Angelica RO¯U

    (ãDanubiusÓ University of Galati, Romania)

Abstract

This article aims to analyze the limits of the judgment of the admissibility in principle of the extraordinary appeal of the revision of a criminal sentence and the delimitation of the judgment of the merits of such an appeal; we will emphasize, despite some jurisprudential interpretations, that between these two stages there is a link of interdependence, in the sense that the court cannot re-judge the merits of the case in the absence of a solution to admit in principle the review request, but it cannot also reject as inadmissible basically an application for review, with arguments that prejudge the merits of this application, much less the merits of the case. Another interpretation inevitably leads to the violation of a fundamental right, that of the right of access to the court.

Suggested Citation

  • Angelica RO¯U, 2023. "Request for Revision Declared Inadmissible in Principle, after the Constitutional Court Admitted the Exception of Unconstitutionality Invoked in That Case. Consequences in Terms of the Right of Access," Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, Societatea de Stiinte Juridice si Administrative (Society of Juridical and Administrative Sciences), vol. 12(1), pages 99-110, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sja:journl:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:99-110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://adjuris.ro/revista/articole/An12nr1/11.%20Angelica%20Rosu%20EN.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    exception of unconstitutionality; criminal sentence; request for revision; the Constitutional Court.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    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:sja:journl:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:99-110. 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: Catalin-Silviu Sararu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssjarea.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.