This category of criticism includes claims such
Aownership as a result of the application of some institutions of civil law. In accordance with its jurisprudence Decision no. of July published in the Official Gazette of Romania Part I no. of July the Court finds that the general legal regime of property public or private aims as essence the three elements of the property right possession use disposition being predominantly a private law regime. The regime of property and the right to property and still at a general level represents a legal reality that governs legal relations of significant social value that calls for regulation through an organic law while the.Specific rules for exercising the attributes of the right of ownership represent another Country Email List reality legal of lesser importance which can be established by ordinary laws or as the case may be by ordinances. Moreover the legislator also adopted regulations that have an impact on property rights through ordinary laws such as the Fiscal Procedure Code Law no. published in the Official Gazette of Romania Part I no. of July which in art. regulates confiscations ordered according to the law paragraph .
https://zh-cn.buylead.me/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/roslin-country-email-list-300x175.jpg
The Court notes the conformity of the procedure for the adoption of Law no. with the provisions of art. para. lit. m of the Constitution and therefore will reject the exception of unconstitutionality of Law no. viewed as a whole. . Regarding a series of criticisms formulated against the provisions of Law no. by invoking the principles of predictability and accessibility of the law the Court considers that the interpretation and application rather than their constitutionality are concerned. as that Law no. derogates from civil legislation without expressly indicating the textarticle from which it derogates that from the preparatory works of Law no. there are no substantiation notes studies to reflect the.
頁:
[1]