Matei Adrian-Bogdan, grupa 102

ENGLISH
LAW
vs
ROMANIAN
LAW

Facultatea de Drept, Universitatea din

Bucureti

English law
English law is the legal system of England and Wales, and is the basis of
common law legal systems used in most Commonwealth 1 countries and the
United States except Louisiana (as opposed to civil law or pluralist systems in use
in other countries). It was exported to Commonwealth countries while the British
Empire was established and maintained, and it forms the basis of the
jurisprudence of most of those countries. English law prior to the American
Revolution is still part of the law of the United States through reception statutes 2,
except in Louisiana, and provides the basis for many American legal traditions
and policies, though it has no superseding jurisdiction.
English law in its strictest sense applies within the jurisdiction of England
and Wales. Whilst Wales now has a devolved Assembly 3, any legislation which
1

The Commonwealth of Nations, normally referred to as the Commonwealth and formerly

known as the British Commonwealth, is an intergovernmental organization of 54
independent member states. All members except Mozambique and Rwanda were part of
the British Empire, out of which the Commonwealth developed.
2

A reception statute is a statutory law adopted as a former British colony becomes

independent, by which the new nation adopts (i.e. receives) pre-independence English
law, to the extent not explicitly rejected by the legislative body or constitution of the new
nation. Reception statutes generally consider the English common law dating prior to
independence, and the precedents originating from it, as the default law, because of the
importance of using an extensive and predictable body of law to govern the conduct of
citizens and businesses in a new state. All U.S. states, except Louisiana, have either
implemented reception statutes or adopted the common law by judicial opinion.
3

The National Assembly for Wales is a devolved assembly with power to make legislation
in Wales. The Assembly comprises 60 members, who are known as Assembly Members, or
AMs. Members are elected for four-year terms under an additional members system,
where 40 AMs represent geographical constituencies elected by the plurality system, and
20 AMs from five electoral regions using the dHondt method of proportional
representation.

that Assembly enacts is enacted in particular circumscribed policy areas defined

by the Government of Wales Act 2006 4, other legislation of the Parliament of the
United Kingdom, or by orders in council given under the authority of the 2006
Act. Furthermore that legislation is, as with any by-law made by any other body
within England and Wales, interpreted by the undivided judiciary of England and
Wales.
The essence of English common law is that it is made by judges sitting in
courts, applying their common sense and knowledge of legal precedent to the
facts before them. A decision of the highest appeal court in England and Wales,
the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, is binding on every other court in the
hierarchy, and they will follow its directions. For example, the crime of murder
does not exist as a result of an Act of Parliament but rather it is a common law
crime. It is a crime by virtue of the constitutional authority of the courts and their
previous decisions. Common law can be amended or repealed by Parliament;
murder, by way of example, carries a mandatory life sentence today, but had
previously allowed the death penalty.
England and Wales are constituent countries of the United Kingdom, which
is a member of the European Union. Hence, EU law is a part of English law. The
European Union consists mainly of countries which use civil law and so the civil
law system is also in England in this form. The European Court of Justice can
direct English and Welsh courts on the meaning of areas of law in which the EU
has passed legislation.
The oldest written law currently in force is the Distress Act, part of the
Statute of Marlborough, 1267. Three sections of Magna Carta originally signed in
1215 and a landmark in the development of English law are extant but arguably
they date to the consolidation of the Act in 1297.

Common law
Since 1189, English law has been described as a common law rather than a
civil law system (i.e. there has been no major codification of the law, and judicial
precedents are binding as opposed to persuasive). This may have been due to
the Norman conquest of England5, which introduced a number of legal concepts
and institutions from Norman law into the English system. In the early centuries
of English common law, the justices and judges were responsible for adapting the

The Government of Wales Act 2006 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom
that reforms the National Assembly for Wales and allows further powers to be granted
more easily. The Act creates a system of government with a separate executive drawn
from and accountable to the legislature.
5

Norman Conquest, the military conquest of England by William, duke of Normandy,

primarily effected by his decisive victory at the Battle of Hastings (Oct. 14, 1066) and
resulting ultimately in profound political, administrative, and social changes in the British
Isles.

Writ system to meet every day needs, applying a mixture of precedent and
common sense to build up a body of internally consistent law, e.g. the Law
Merchant began in the Pie-Powder Courts (a corruption of the French "piedspoudrs" or "dusty feet", meaning ad hoc marketplace courts). As Parliament
developed in strength legislation gradually overtook judicial law making so that,
today, judges are only able to innovate in certain very narrowly defined areas.
Time before 1189 was defined in 1276 as being time immemorial.
One of the major problems in the early centuries was to produce a system
that was certain in its operation and predictable in its outcomes. Too many judges
were either partial or incompetent, acquiring their positions only by virtue of their
rank in society. Thus, a standardized procedure slowly emerged, based on a
system termed stare decisis6 which basically means "let the decision stand". The
doctrine of precedent which requires similar cases to be adjudicated in a like
manner falls under the principle of stare decisis. Thus, the ratio decidendi 7 of
each case will bind future cases on the same generic set of facts both
horizontally and vertically in the court structure. The highest appellate court in
the UK is the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and its decisions are binding
on every other court in the hierarchy which is obliged to apply its rulings as the
law of the land. The Court of Appeal binds the lower courts, and so on.

Overseas influences
The influences are two-way.

The United Kingdom exported the English legal system to the

Commonwealth countries during the British Empire, and many aspects of
that system have persisted after the British withdrew or granted
independence to former dominions. English law prior to the Wars of
Independence is still an influence on United States law, and provides the
basis for many American legal traditions and policies. Many states that
were formerly subject to English law (such as Australia) continue to
recognize a link to English law subject, of course, to statutory
modification and judicial revision to match the law to local conditions
and decisions from the English law reports continue to be cited from time
to time as persuasive authority in present day judicial opinions. For a few
states, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council remains the ultimate
court of appeal. Many jurisdictions which were formerly subject to English
law (such as Hong Kong) continue to recognize the common law of
England as their own subject, of course, to statutory modification and

Stare decisis is a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents
established by prior decisions. The words originate from the phrasing of the principle in
the Latin maxim Stare decisis et non quieta movere: "to stand by decisions and not
disturb the undisturbed." In a legal context, this is understood to mean that courts should
generally abide by precedents and not disturb settled matters.
7

Ratio decidendi is a Latin phrase meaning "the reason" or "the rationale for the
decision." The ratio decidendi is "the point in a case which determines the judgment" or
"the principle which the case establishes."

judicial revision and decisions from the English Reports continue to be

cited from time to time as persuasive authority in present day judicial
opinions.

The UK is a dualist in its relationship with international law, i.e.

international obligations have to be formally incorporated into English
law before the courts are obliged to apply supranational laws. For
example, the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms was signed in 1950 and the UK allowed individuals to directly
petition the European Commission on Human Rights from 1966. Now
Human Rights Act 1998 makes it unlawful "... for a public authority to act
in a way which is incompatible with a convention right", where a "public
authority" is any person or body which exercises a public function,
expressly including the courts but expressly excluding Parliament.
Although the European Convention has begun to be applied to the acts of
non-state agents, the HRA does not make the Convention specifically
applicable between private parties. Courts have taken the Convention
into account in interpreting the common law. They also must take the
Convention into account in interpreting Acts of Parliament, but must
ultimately follow the terms of the Act even if inconsistent with the
Convention.

Similarly, because the UK remains a strong international trading nation,

international consistency of decision making is of vital importance, so the
Admiralty is strongly influenced by Public International Law and the
modern commercial treaties and conventions regulating shipping.

Statutory law
The first schedule of the Interpretation Act 1978, defines the following
terms: "British Islands", "England", and "United Kingdom". The use of the term
"British Isles" is virtually obsolete in statutes and, when it does appear, it is
taken to be synonymous with "British Islands". For interpretation purposes,
England includes a number of specified elements:
Wales and Berwick Act 1746, section 3 (entire Act now repealed)
formally incorporated Wales and Berwick-upon-Tweed into England. But
section 4 Welsh Language Act 1967 provided that references to
England in future Acts of Parliament should no longer include Wales
(see now Interpretation Act 1978, Schedule 3, part 1). But Dicey &
Morris say (at p28) "It seems desirable to adhere to Dicey's [the
original] definition for reasons of convenience and especially of brevity.
It would be cumbersome to have to add "or Wales" after "England" and
"or Welsh" after "English" every time those words are used."
the "adjacent islands" of the Isle of Wight and Anglesey are a part of
England and Wales by custom, while Harman v Bolt (1931) 47 TLR 219
expressly confirms that Lundy is a part of England.

 the "adjacent territorial waters" by virtue of the Territorial Waters

Jurisdiction Act 1878 and the Continental Shelf Act 1964 as amended
by the Oil and Gas Enterprise Act 1982.

"Great Britain" means England (with Wales) and Scotland including its
adjacent territorial waters and the islands of Orkney and Shetland, the
Hebrides, and Rockall (by virtue of the Island of Rockall Act 1972). The "United
Kingdom" means Great Britain and Northern Ireland and their adjacent
territorial waters. It does not include the Isle of Man, nor the Channel Islands,
whose independent status was discussed in Rover International Ltd. v Canon
Film Sales Ltd. (1987) 1 WLR 1597 and Chloride Industrial Batteries Ltd. v F. &
W. Freight Ltd. (1989) 1 WLR 823. The "British Islands" means the "United
Kingdom", the Isle of Man, and the Channel Islands.

Citation style
Statutory law is referred to as "Title of Act Year", where the title is the "short
title", and ends in "Act", as in "Interpretation Act 1978". Compare with
American convention, which includes "of", as in "Civil Rights Act of 1964".
This became the usual way to refer to Acts in the second half of the 19th
century, starting in the 1840s; previously Acts were referred to by their long
title together with the regnal year of the parliamentary session in which they
received Royal Assent, and the chapter number. For example, the Pleading in
English Act 1362 was referred to as 36 Edw. III c. 15, meaning "36th year of the
reign of Edward III, chapter 15", though in the past this was all spelt out,
together with the long title.

Equity law
Equity law represents the custom of courts outside the common law or
coded law. Equity provided remedies in situations in which precedent or
statutory law might not apply or be equitable.
By the end of the 13th century, the English kings common-law courts had
largely limited the relief available in civil cases to the payment of damages and
to the recovery of the possession of property. They had refused to extend and
diversify their types of relief to meet the needs of new and more complex
situations. Disappointed litigants had turned to the king with petitions for
justice because the courts had afforded either no remedy or one that was
ineffective. These petitions were referred to the lord chancellor, who was the
kings principal minister. By the early years of the 14th century the petitions
were going directly to the chancellor, and by the middle of that century the
Court of Chancery was recognized as a new and distinct court.

These developments resulted in the fashioning by the chancellor of new

equitable remedies. The following are representative: specific performance of
contract, whereby the victim of a breach might compel the exact performance
promised if damages would be a poor substitute, as in contracts to sell land and
unique chattels; the enforcement of trusts, where one who had been given title
to property in order to manage it for another was required to fulfill his fiduciary
obligations; injunction to prevent threatened or continuing wrong, such as
destruction of the plaintiffs invaluable shade trees; restitution of benefits
wrongfully acquired, by compulsory surrender of the ill-gotten gains, in order to
prevent unjust enrichment; the correction and cancellation of written
instruments for mistake and misrepresentation; and the equity of redemption,
which enabled a defaulting mortgagor to reclaim his land if he tendered
principal and interest within a reasonable time after forfeiture and before
foreclosure. Such new equitable remedies contrasted with the narrow rigidity of
common-law remedies.
The full growth of equitable remedies was retarded, however, by political
pressures from judges and Parliament not to trespass upon the province of the
separate law courts. As a result, the chancellor was forced to agree not to hear
a case unless there was no remedy at law (e.g., trust) or the remedy at law was
inadequate or the threatened injury would be irreparable.
Another restrictive influence was the development of precedent in the
Chancery. For generations the chancellors had not considered themselves
bound by precedents or rules of law; emphasis had been put mainly upon the
discretionary treatment of needs of the individual case. From the mid-16th
century on, however, the chancellors were usually common lawyers who began
shaping equity into an established set of rules. By the middle of the 17th
century the equity administered by the Court of Chancery had become a
recognized part of the law of the land: equity gave justice according to law
rather than executive justice. Finally, by the Judicature Act of 1873, the
competitive, separate law and equity courts, with their attendant delays,
expense, and injustices, were abolished and their work combined in a single,
departmentalized Supreme Court of Judicature.
Courts of equity also developed early in the United States; but in the late
19th and early 20th centuries most U.S. states similarly abolished the
distinctions between actions at law and suits in equity and fused their
administration in one procedural system, with only one civil action, in the same
court.
Modern equity has been much assisted by legislation. The old notion that
equity protects only property rights has been virtually abandoned. Now an
employee, for example, can be barred from competing with his employer after
discharge or resignation. Statutes have facilitated specific performance of
cooperative-marketing contracts and agreements to arbitrate future
commercial or labour disputes. An injunction may now be obtainedwhere
other factors of appropriateness permitagainst threatened injury to interests
of personality, such as civil liberties, privacy, reputation, and domestic

relations. Enabling legislation has immensely increased the resort to injunction

by government agencies to prevent violation of regulatory statutes,
notwithstanding criminal penalties.

Courts of England and Wales

Her Majesty's Courts of Justice of England and Wales are the civil and
criminal courts responsible for the administration of justice in England and
Wales; they apply English law, the law of England and Wales, and are
established under Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom does not have a single unified legal systemEngland
and Wales have one system, Scotland another, and Northern Ireland a third.
There are exceptions to this rule; for example in immigration law, the Asylum
and Immigration Tribunal's jurisdiction covers the whole of the United Kingdom,
while in employment law there is a single system of Employment Tribunals for
England, Wales, and Scotland (but not Northern Ireland).
The Court of Appeal, the High Court, the Crown Court, the Magistrates'
Courts, and the County Courts are administered by Her Majesty's Courts and
Tribunals Service, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice.

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

The Supreme Court is the highest appeal court in almost all cases in
England and Wales. Prior to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 this role was
held by the House of Lords. The Supreme Court is also the highest court of
appeal for devolution matters, a role previously held by the Privy Council.

Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

The Privy Council is the highest court of appeal for a small number of
Commonwealth countries, colonies and the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.
There are a number of smaller statutory jurisdictions, such as appeals from
ecclesiastical and professional bodies. The judges who sit on the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council are also the members of the Supreme Court.

The Senior Courts of England and Wales

The Senior Courts of England and Wales were originally created by the
Judicature Acts as the "Supreme Court of Judicature". It was renamed the
"Supreme Court of England and Wales" in 1981, and again to the "Senior Courts
of England and Wales" by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. It consists of the
following courts:

Court of Appeal

High Court of Justice

Crown Court

Court of Appeal
The Court of Appeal deals only with appeals from other courts or tribunals.
The Court of Appeal consists of two divisions: the Civil Division hears appeals
from the High Court and County Court and certain superior tribunals, while the
Criminal Division may only hear appeals from the Crown Court connected with a
trial on indictment (i.e., for a serious offence). Its decisions are binding on all
courts, including itself, apart from the Supreme Court.

High Court
The High Court of Justice functions, both as a civil court of first instance
and a criminal and civil appellate court for cases from the subordinate courts. It
consists of three divisions: the Queen's Bench, the Chancery and the Family
divisions. The divisions of the High Court are not separate courts, but have
somewhat separate procedures and practices adapted to their purposes.
Although particular kinds of cases will be assigned to each division depending
on their subject matter, each division may exercise the jurisdiction of the High
Court. However, beginning proceedings in the wrong division may result in a
costs penalty.

Crown Court
The Crown Court is a criminal court of both original and appellate
jurisdiction which in addition handles a limited amount of civil business both at
first instance and on appeal. It was established by the Courts Act 1971. It
replaced the Assizes whereby High Court judges would periodically travel
around the country hearing cases, and Quarter Sessions which were periodic
county courts. The Old Bailey is the unofficial name of London's most famous
Criminal Court, which is now part of the Crown Court. Its official name is the

"Central Criminal Court". The Crown Court also hears appeals from Magistrates'
Courts.
The Crown Court is the only court in England and Wales that has the
jurisdiction to try cases on indictment and when exercising such a role it is a
superior court in that its judgments cannot be reviewed by the Administrative
Court of the Queens Bench Division of the High Court.
The Crown Court is an inferior court in respect of the other work it
undertakes, viz. inter alia, appeals from the Magistrates courts and other
tribunals.

Subordinate courts
The most common subordinate courts in England and Wales are the
Magistrates' Courts
Family Proceedings Courts
Youth courts
County Courts

Magistrates', Family Proceedings and Youth Courts

Magistrates' Courts are presided over by a bench of lay magistrates (aka
justices of the peace), or a legally-trained district judge (formerly known as a
stipendiary magistrate), sitting in each local justice area. There are no juries.
They hear minor criminal cases, as well as certain licensing applications. Youth
courts are run on similar lines to Adult magistrates' courts but deal with
offenders aged between the ages of 10 and 17 inclusive. Youth courts are
presided over by a specially trained subset of experienced adult magistrates or
a district judge. Youth magistrates have a wider catalogue of disposals available
to them for dealing with young offenders and often hear more serious cases
against youths (which for adults would normally be dealt with by the Crown
Court). In addition some Magistrates' Courts are also a Family Proceedings
Court and hear Family law cases including care cases and they have the power
to make adoption orders. Family Proceedings Courts are not open to the public.
The Family Proceedings Court Rules 1991 apply to cases in the Family
Proceedings Court. Youth courts are not open to the public for observation, only
the parties involved in a case being admitted.

County Courts
County Courts are statutory courts with a purely civil jurisdiction. They are
presided over by either a District or Circuit Judge and, except in a small
minority of cases such as civil actions against the Police, the judge sits alone as
trier of fact and law without assistance from a jury. County courts have divorce

jurisdiction
adoptions.

and undertake private

family cases,

care

proceedings and

County Courts are local courts in the sense that each one has an area over
which certain kinds of jurisdictionsuch as actions concerning land or cases
concerning children who reside in the areaare exercised. For example,
proceedings for possession of land must be started in the county court in whose
district the property lies. However, in general any county court in England and
Wales may hear any action and claims are frequently transferred from court to
court. it sits in 92 different cities of UK.

Tribunals
The Court Service administers the tribunals that fall under the direct
responsibility of the Lord Chancellor. Tribunals can be considered the lowest
rung of the court hierarchy in England and Wales.

Special courts and tribunals

In addition, there are many other specialist courts. These are often
described as "Tribunals" rather than courts, but the difference in name is not of
any great consequence. For example an Employment Tribunal is an inferior
court of record for the purposes of the law of contempt of court. In many cases
there is a statutory right of appeal from a tribunal to a particular court or
specially constituted appellate tribunal. In the absence of a specific appeals
court, the only remedy from a decision of a Tribunal may be a judicial review to
the High Court, which will often be more limited in scope than an appeal.
Examples of specialist courts are:
o

Employment Tribunals (formerly Industrial Tribunals) with appeal to the

Employment Appeal Tribunal

the Employment Appeal Tribunal, which is a superior court of record, and

therefore not subject to judicial review, appeals go to the Court of Appeal

Leasehold Valuation Tribunals, with appeal to the Lands Tribunal

the Lands Tribunal (England, Wales and Northern Ireland)

the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal established under the
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007

Coroners' courts
The post of coroner is ancient, dating from the 11th century, and coroners
still sit today to determine the cause of death in situations where people have
died in potentially suspicious circumstances, abroad, or in the care of central
authority. They also have jurisdiction over treasure trove.

Ecclesiastical courts

The Church of England is an established church (i.e. it is the official state

church) and formerly had exclusive or non-exclusive subject matter jurisdiction
over marriage and divorce cases, testamentary matters, defamation, and
several other areas. Since the 19th century, the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical
courts has narrowed principally to matters of church property and errant clergy.
Each Diocese has a 'Chancellor' (either a barrister or solicitor) who acts as a
judge in the consistory court of the diocese. The Bishop no longer has the right
to preside personally, as he formerly did. Appeals lie to the Arches Court (in
Canterbury) and the Chancery Court (in York), and from them to the Court of
Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved (CECR). From the CECR appeals lie to the
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Other courts
Military Courts of the United Kingdom (including the Summary Appeal
Court, Service Civilian Court, Court Martial and Court Martial Appeal
Court)
Patents County Court (deals with simpler intellectual property cases than
the High Court Patents Court)
Restrictive Practices Court (deals with some competition matters)
Election court (ad-hoc courts hearing petitions against election results)
Court of Chivalry (ancient and rarely-convened court dealing with
heraldry)
Courts leet (manorial courts - now mostly ceremonial)

Criminal cases
There are two kinds of criminal trial: 'summary' and 'on indictment'. For an
adult, summary trials take place in a magistrates' court, while trials on
indictment take place in the Crown Court. Despite the possibility of two venues
for trial, almost all criminal cases, however serious, commence in the
Magistrates' Courts. It is possible to start a trial for an indictable offence by a
voluntary bill of indictment, and go directly to the Crown Court, but that would
be unusual.
A criminal case that starts in the Magistrates' Court may begin either by
the defendant being charged and then being brought forcibly before
Magistrates or by summons to the defendant to appear on a certain day before
the Magistrates. A summons is usually confined to very minor offences. The
hearing (of the charge or summons) before the Magistrates is known as a "first
appearance".
Offences are of three categories: indictable only, summary and either way.
Indictable only offences such as murder and rape must be tried on indictment
in the Crown Court. On first appearance, the Magistrates must immediately

refer the defendant to the Crown Court for trial, their only role being to decide
whether to remand the defendant on bail or in custody.
Summary offences, such as most motoring offences, are much less serious
and most must be tried in the Magistrates' Court, although a few may be sent
for trial to the Crown Court along with other offences that may be tried there
(for example assault). The vast majority of offences are also concluded in the
Magistrates' Court (over 90% of cases).
Either way offences are intermediate offences such as theft and, with the
exception of low value criminal damage, may be tried either summarily (by
magistrates) or by Judge and Jury in the Crown Court. If the magistrates
consider that an either way offence is too serious for them to deal with, they
may "decline jurisdiction" which means that the defendant will have to appear
in the Crown Court. Conversely even if the magistrates accept jurisdiction, an
adult defendant has a right to compel a jury trial. Defendants under 18 years of
age do not have this right and will be tried in the Youth Court (similar to a
Magistrates' Court) unless the case is homicide or else is particularly serious.
A Magistrates' Court is made up in two ways. Either a group (known as a
'bench') of 'lay magistrates', who do not have to be, and are not normally,
lawyers, will hear the case. A lay bench must consist of at least three
magistrates. Alternatively a case may be heard by a district judge (formerly
known as a stipendiary magistrate), who will be a qualified lawyer and will sit
singly, but has the same powers as a lay bench. District judges usually sit in the
more busy courts in cities or hear complex cases (e.g. extradition). Magistrates
have limited sentencing powers.
In the Crown Court, the case is tried before a Recorder (part time judge),
Circuit Judge or a High Court judge, and a jury. The seniority of the judge
depends on the seriousness and complexity of the case. The jury is involved
only if the defendant enters a plea of "not guilty".

Appeals
From the Magistrates' Court, an appeal can be taken to the Crown Court on
matters of fact and law or, on matters of law alone, to the Administrative Court
of Queen's Bench Division of the High Court, which is called an appeal "by way
of case stated". The Magistrates' Court is also an inferior court and is therefore
subject to judicial review.
The Crown Court is more complicated. When it is hearing a trial on
indictment (a jury trial) it is treated as a superior court, which means that its
decisions may not be judicially reviewed and appeal lies only to the Criminal
Division of the Court of Appeal.
In other circumstances (for example when acting as an appeal court from a
Magistrates' Court) the Crown Court is an inferior court, which means that it is
subject to judicial review. When acting as an inferior court, appeals by way of
case stated on matters of law may be made to the Administrative Court.

Appeals from the High Court, in criminal matters, lie only to the Supreme
Court. Appeals from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) may also only be
taken to the Supreme Court.
Appeals to the Supreme Court are unusual in that the court from which
appeal is being made (either the High Court or the Court of Appeal) must certify
that there is a point of law of general public importance. This additional control
mechanism is not present with civil appeals and means that far fewer criminal
appeals are heard by the Supreme Court.

Civil cases
Under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, civil claims under 5,000 are dealt with in
the County Court under the 'Small Claims Track'. This is generally known to the
lay public as the 'Small Claims Court' but does not exist as a separate court.
Claims between 5,000 and 25,000 that are capable of being tried within one
day are allocated to the 'Fast Track' and claims over 25,000 to the 'Multi
Track'. These 'tracks' are labels for the use of the court system the actual
cases will be heard in the County Court or the High Court depending on their
value.
For Personal Injury, Defamation cases and some Landlord and Tenant disputes
the thresholds for each track have different values.

Romania's 1991 constitution proclaims Romania a democracy and

market economy, in which human dignity, civic rights and freedoms, the
unhindered development of human personality, justice, and political pluralism are
supreme and guaranteed values. The constitution directs the state to implement
free trade, protect the principle of competition, and provide a favorable
framework for production. The constitution provides for a President, a Parliament,
a Constitutional Court and a separate system of lower courts that includes a
Supreme Court.
The two-chamber Parliament, consisting of the Chamber of Deputies and the
Senate, is the law-making authority. Deputies and senators are elected for 4-year
terms by universal suffrage.
The president is elected by popular vote for a maximum of two 4-year terms. He
is the Chief of State, charged with safeguarding the constitution, foreign affairs,
and the proper functioning of public authorities. He is supreme commander of the

armed forces and chairman of the Supreme Defense Council. According to the
constitution, he acts as mediator among the power centers within the state, as
well as between the state and society. The president nominates the prime
minister, who in turn appoints the government, which must be confirmed by a
vote of confidence from Parliament.

Courts & Judgments

The Romanian legal system is based on the Napoleonic Code. The judiciary is to
be independent, and judges appointed by the president are not removable. The
president and other judges of the Supreme Court are appointed for a term of 6
years and may serve consecutive terms. Proceedings are public, except in special
circumstances provided for by law.
The Constitutional Court adjudicates the constitutionality of challenged laws, and
decides on appeals from the regular court system concerning the
unconstitutionality of laws and decrees. The court consists of nine judges,
appointed for a term of 9 years. Three judges are appointed by the Chamber of
Deputies, three by the Senate, and three by the president of Romania.

Legal Profession
A Romanian lawyer is an "avocat." There are no private law firms in Romania;
every avocat works in an avocat's office, and a group of from two to six such
offices forms a barou (from the French barreau). There are in all about 4,500
advocates, grouped in 41 barous (one for each district and one for the city of
Bucharest), which form, together, Uniunea Avocatilor din Romania (The
Advocates' Union of Romania). Candidates for the bar must obtain an approved
law degree; the course lasts four years. Graduates must then complete two years
of supervised practical training leading to a Bar Examination. Applicants are then
fully qualified.

Courts in Romania

Romania has a civil law system, based on the French model, with various levels of
court hierarchy:

Local courts (Romanian: Judectorii)

40 county courts and the Bucharest Municipal Court (Romanian: Tribunale)

15 Courts of Appeal (Romanian: Curi de apel)

the High Court of Cassation and Justice (Romanian: nalta Curte de Casaie
i Justiie)

the Constitutional Court (Romanian: Curtea Constituional)

High Court of Cassation and Justice

The High Court of Cassation and Justice (Romanian: nalta Curte de Casaie i
Justiie) is Romania's supreme court, and the court of last resort. It is the
equivalent of France's Cour de cassation and serves a similar function to other
courts of cassation around the world. Nicolae Popa served as its president from
2004 to 2009.
It held various names during its existence: "Tribunalul Suprem" (Supreme
Tribunal) during Communist times (1947-1990), and "Curtea Suprem de Justiie"
(Supreme Court of Justice) from 1990 to 2003. The name "nalta Curte de Casaie
i Justiie" was re-introduced in 2003, having been also used during the Kingdom
of Romania (until 1947).