Abstract: The number of cases concerning the abusive clauses inserted in banking contracts, trialed in front of the national courts, is a considerable one. It seems like the compliance of the national regulations with the provisions of Directive 93/13 / EEC on 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, is a difficult process. The purpose of the present study is to observe the current state of the alignment of the national legislation and jurisprudence to the European tendencies in the matter. In particular, we are interested in the admissibility of invoking abusive clauses in the process of a contestation of an execution, since the national case law is not unitary in this regard. Even in theory, opinions are divided. On June 26, 2019, the European Court of Justice expressed its opinion on this matter, in the cause C407/18, the case of Aleş Kuhar, Jožef Kuhar v Addiko Bank d.d. At the end of the study, we aim to point out the main directions set at European level that must be followed by the national legislation and case law of a Member State.
European Union Law
THE DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES OF INCOMPATIBILITY AND CONFLICT OF INTERESTS REGARDING PUBLIC OFFICIALS, AS PROVIDED FOR BY THE LEGISLATION OF ROMANIA, ARE OF AN CRIMINAL NATURE UNDER ARTICLE 6, PARAGRAPH 1 ECHR
UE Law and Comparative Law
INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS – LEGISLATIVE CHANGES MADE IN THE ROMANIAN LEGISLATION, THROUGH LAW NO. 151/2019, RELATED TO THE EUROPEAN LEGISLATION AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTIONS THAT PROTECT THE FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS