You are on page 1of 30

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr.

3/2010

ASPECTE TEORETICE I DE PRACTIC JUDICIAR PRIVIND OBLIGAIA DE NTREINERE DINTRE PRINI I COPIL N REGLEMENTAREA CODULUI FAMILIEI I A NOULUI COD CIVIL

THEORETICAL AND JUDICIAL PRACTICE ASPECTS REGARDING THE SUPPORTING OBLIGATION BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILD IN THE REGULATION OF THE FAMILY CODE AND THE NEW CIVIL CODE

Dr. Alin-Gheorghe GAVRILESCU - Lector universitar Catedra de Drept Facultatea de tiine Juridice i Litere Universitatea Constantin Brncui din Trgu-Jiu
Abstract: Regarded in its finality, that of assuring the material conditions to fulfill the child's growth, education and professional training liabilities, parent's obligation to support him represents one of the specific duties that give a form to the judicial institution of parental care. Specific requirement of children support by parents or adopter is that the state of need of the minor is determined by the particular situation in which it is found, being placed in a period of training following a school and is preparing for a profession or occupation, which prevent him from achieving income from work even if according to the law he would be able to work. Until otherwise provided, the minor is supposed to be in need, unlike the major creditor of the support obligation, which, contrary to evidence, it is assumed not being in need, considering that, with capacity for work, he has means of support. Keywords: obligation, child, parent's, debtor, creditor

PhD Alin-Gheorghe GAVRILESCU University Lecturer Law Chair Faculty of Juridical Sciences and Letters Constantin Brncui University of TrguJiu
Abstract: Regarded in its finality, that of assuring the material conditions to fulfill the child's growth, education and professional training liabilities, parent's obligation to support him represents one of the specific duties that give a form to the judicial institution of parental care. Specific requirement of children support by parents or adopter is that the state of need of the minor is determined by the particular situation in which it is found, being placed in a period of training following a school and is preparing for a profession or occupation, which prevent him from achieving income from work even if according to the law he would be able to work. Until otherwise provided, the minor is supposed to be in need, unlike the major creditor of the support obligation, which, contrary to evidence, it is assumed not being in need, considering that, with capacity for work, he has means of support. Keywords: obligation, child, parent's, debtor, creditor

I. Obligaia de ntreinere dintre I. The Supporting Obligation prini i copil n reglementarea Codului between Parents and Child in the familiei Regulation of the Family Code 1.1. Noiuni introductive. 1.1. Introductory Notions. Reglementare Regulation Privit n finalitatea ei, aceea de a Regarded in its ending, the one to asigura condiiile materiale pentru ndeplinirea provide the material conditions needed in
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

109

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

sarcinilor de cretere, educare i pregtire profesional a copilului, obligaia prinilor de a-l ntreine reprezint una din ndatoririle specifice care dau coninut instituiei juridice a ocrotirii printeti. Obligaia prinilor de a ntreine copilul i are izvorul n art. 86 alin. 1 Codul familiei care arat c obligaia de ntreinere exist ntre prini i copii, ns, datorit aspectelor specifice pe care aceast obligaie le prezint atunci cnd copiii sunt minori legiuitorul se refer la ea i n capitolul I din Titlul III privitor la ocrotirea minorului, stabilind n art. 107 Codul familiei c minorul este ntreinut de prinii si. 1.2. Debitorii i creditorii obligaiei Debitori ai obligaiei de ntreinere sunt prinii, indiferent dac sunt din cstorie, din afara cstoriei sau din adopie. n cazul copilului din cstorie obligaia de ntreinere a acestuia revine ambilor prini, chiar dac sunt desprii n fapt1, iar n cazul celui din afara cstoriei aceasta cade numai n sarcina printelui fa de care copilul i-a stabilit filiaia2. n situaia n care copilul este adoptat drepturile i obligaiile printeti trec la adoptator. Acest efect al adopiei rezult din prevederile art. 51 alin. 1 din Legea nr. 273/2004 care stabilesc c adoptatorul are fa de copilul adoptat drepturile i ndatoririle printelui firesc fa de copilul su. n consecin, n cazul adopiei, printele firesc nu mai datoreaz ntreinere copilului adoptat, debitor al ntreinerii fiind adoptatorul. Excepie face situaia n care copilul este adoptat de ctre soul printelui firesc. ntr-un atare caz, art. 51 alin. 2 din lege prevede c drepturile i ndatoririle printeti se exercit de ctre adoptator i de ctre printele firesc, ambii avnd, aadar, calitatea de debitori ai obligaiei de ntreinere. n cazul n care adopia nceteaz ca urmare a declarrii nulitii acesteia, art. 59 alin. 2 din lege arat c dac instana nu decide instituirea tutelei sau a altor msuri de protecie special a copilului, n condiiile legii, drepturile i ndatoririle printeti sunt redobndite de ctre

order to accomplish the tasks to raise, educate and professionally train the child, the parents obligation to support him or her represents one of the specific duties that define the juridical institution of the parental protection. The parents obligation to support their child has its source in art. 86, paragraph 1 of Family Code that shows that the supporting obligation exists between parents and children, but, due to the specific aspects this obligation presents when the children are minor, the legislator also refers to it in chapter I of Title II regarding the minors protection, establishing in art. 107 of Family Code that the minor is supported by his or her parents. 1.2. Debtors and Creditors of the Obligation The debtors of the supporting obligation are the parents, even if they are from the marriage, outside the marriage or from adoption. In case of the child from the marriage, his or her supporting obligation belongs to both of the parents, even if they are actually separated57, and in case of the one outside the marriage, the obligation belongs only to the parent who has established a filiation with the child58. If the child is adopted, the parental rights and obligations belong to the adopter. This effect of the adoption results from the stipulations of art. 51, paragraph 1 of Law no. 273/2004 that establish that the adopter has for the adopted child the natural parents rights and duties for his or her child. As a consequence, in case of adoption, the natural parent does not have to support anymore the adopted child, the adopter being the debtor of the support. The exception is represented by the situation when the child is adopted by the husband of the natural parent. In such a case, art. 51, paragraph 2 of the law stipulates that the parental rights and duties are exerted by the adopter and by the natural parent, both of them having thus the quality of debtors of the supporting obligation. If the adoption stops as a consequence of declaring its nullity, art. 59, paragraph 2 of the law shows that, if the court does not decide the institution of the guardianship or of other

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

110

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

prinii fireti, care redevin debitori ai obligaiei de ntreinere iar adoptatorul nu mai poate fi obligat s plteasc adoptatului ntreinere ct timp este minor. Printele sau, dup caz, adoptatorul, are calitatea de debitor al obligaiei de ntreinere i n situaia n care a fost deczut din drepturile printeti (art. 110 Codul familiei prevede c decderea din drepturile printeti de nu scutete pe printe de ndatorirea de a ntreine copilul), precum i n cazul n care a fost pus sub interdicie3. Dei obligaia legal de ntreinere dintre prini i copii are caracter reciproc, n majoritatea cazurilor creditor al acestei obligaii este copilul minor fa de care exist drepturile i ndatoririle printeti, ntruct acesta se afl n imposibilitatea de a realiza venituri din munc i nu are, de regul, nici alte mijloace materiale pentru a-i asigura cele necesare existenei. n ipoteza n care copilul ar avea bunuri nsemnate sau ar realiza venituri din munc, el ar putea avea i calitatea de debitor al obligaiei de ntreinere dac printele su s-ar afla n nevoie din cauza incapacitii de a muncii. Copilul minor are dreptul la ntreinere indiferent c este din cstorie, din afara cstoriei sau din adopie. 1.3. Condiiile de existen ale obligaiei de ntreinere Prin excepie de la regula general instituit n art. 86 alin. 2 Codul familiei, aceea c este ndreptit la ntreinere numai cel aflat n stare de nevoie determinat de incapacitatea de a munci, legiuitorul a stabilit n art. 86 alin. 3 Codul familiei c descendentul, ct timp este minor, are drept la ntreinere, oricare ar fi pricina nevoii n care se afl. Aadar, n reglementarea Codului familiei, specific obligaiei de ntreinere a copilului de ctre prini sau adoptator este faptul c starea de nevoie a minorului este determinat de situaia special n care acesta se gsete, el aflndu-se ntr-o perioad de formare ntruct urmeaz o coal i se pregtete pentru o profesie sau meserie, situaie care l mpiedic s realizeze

measures of special protection of the child, in the law conditions, the parental rights and duties are regained by the natural parents who become again debtors of the supporting obligation and the adopter cannot be forced anymore to pay for the support of the adopted child as long as he is minor. The parent or, depending on the case, the adopter is also the debtor of the supporting obligation if he was declined from his parental rights (art. 110 of Family Code stipulates that the decline from the parental rights does not release the parent from the obligation to support the child), and also if he was put under interdiction59. Even if the legal supporting obligation between parents and child has a mutual feature, in most of the cases, the creditor of this obligation is the minor child for whom there are the parental rights and duties whereas he or she cannot achieve incomes from work and does not usually have any other material means to provide the things necessary for the existence. If the child has significant goods or achieves incomes from work, he could also be the debtor of the supporting obligation if his parent is needy because of his inability to work. The minor child has the right to be supported even if he is from the marriage, outside the marriage or from adoption. 1.3. Conditions of Existence of the Supporting Obligation By an exception from the general rule instituted in art. 86, paragraph 2 of Family Code, the only one who has the right to be supported is the one in need determined by the inability to work, the legislator established in art. 86, paragraph 3 of Family Code that the descendant, as long as he is minor, has the right to be supported, whatever is the cause of his need. Therefore, in the regulation of the Family Code, specific to the childs supporting obligation by the parents or by the adopter is the fact that the minors need status is determined by his special situation, being in a training period whereas he goes to a certain school and he prepares for a profession or a job, a situation

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

111

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

venituri din munc chiar dac, potrivit legii, ar avea capacitatea de a munci. n raport de prevederile art. 86 alin. 3 Codul familiei n doctrin s-a artat c singura condiie ce trebuie ndeplinit pentru ca minorul s fie ndreptit la ntreinere este starea de nevoie care este prezumat juris tantum pe toat durata minoritii4. Aadar, pn la proba contrar minorul este presupus c se afl n nevoie, spre deosebire de creditorul major al obligaiei de ntreinere care, pn la proba contrar, este presupus c nu se afl n nevoie, considernduse c, avnd capacitate de munc, el are mijloace s se ntrein. Legiuitorul a instituit n art. 107 alin. 2 Codul familiei obligaia prinilor de a asigura condiiile necesare pentru creterea, educarea, nvtura i pregtirea sa profesional i n situaia n care minorul ar avea un venit propriu dar care nu ar fi ndestultor. n practica judiciar s-a decis c printele nu poate fi absolvit de plata unei pensii de ntreinere chiar dac coala asigur copilului echipamentul, cazarea i hrana pe timpul ct frecventeaz cursurile ntruct cheltuielile legate de creterea i educarea unui copil sunt mult mai complexe i au caracter permanent, astfel nct nu se poate considera c ele sunt acoperite prin unele contribuii voluntare sporadice ale printelui5. Dac minorul nu se afl n nevoie ntruct realizeaz venituri proprii el nu este ndreptit s pretind ntreinere de la prinii si6. n acest sens, n practica judiciar s-a decis c minorul ncadrat, care se poate ntreine din venitul su din munc, nu se afl n nevoie i nu are drept la ntreinere n raporturile cu prinii si7. ntruct dispoziiile art. 86 alin. 3 Codul familiei prevd c minorul este ndreptit la ntreinere oricare ar fi pricina nevoii n care se afl, s-ar putea considera c i minorul care a mplinit vrsta prevzut de lege pentru a se putea ncadra n munc dar nu o face i nici nu urmeaz o form de nvmnt sau de calificare profesional este ndreptit la ntreinere din partea prinilor si. n doctrin s-a exprimat ns opinia c descendentul minor care refuz i s se instruiasc urmnd o form

that does not let him to achieve incomes from work even if, according to the law, he would be able to work. Reported to the stipulations of art. 86, paragraph 3 of Family Code in the doctrine it was shown that the only condition that has to be accomplished for the minor to have the right to support is the need status that is juris tantum presumed during the entire minority60. Therefore, until the contrary evidence, the minor is supposed to be in need, unlike the major creditor of the supporting obligation who, until the contrary evidence, is supposed not to be in need, considering that, having the ability to work, he has means to support himself. The legislator instituted in art. 107, paragraph 2 of Family Code the parents obligation to provide the conditions needed in order to raise, educate, teach and professionally prepare the child and for the situation when the minor has his own income but this is not enough. In the judicial practice, it was decided that the parent cannot be absolved from the payment of a supporting alimony even if the school provides to the child the equipment, the accommodation and the food during the classes whereas the expenditures related to a childs raise and education are much more complex and they have a permanent feature so that we cannot consider them as being covered by some voluntary sporadic contributions of the 61 parent . If the minor is not in need whereas he achieves his own incomes, he has not the right to demand support from his parents62. In this sense, in the judicial practice it was decided that the framed minor who can support oneself from his income from work is not in need and does not have any right to be supported by his parents63. Whereas the stipulations of art. 86, paragraph 3 of Family Code forecast that the minor has the right to be supported, whatever is the cause of his need, we may also consider that the minor who has reached the age stipulated by the law in order to be framed in work, but he does not and he does not go to a certain school or a type of professional qualification either has the right to be supported by his parents. But, in

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

112

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

de nvmnt, i s munceasc n cazul n care are vrsta pentru aceasta, sau are chiar o comportare antisocial, ca tendine de vagabondaj etc. ar trebui s piard dreptul la ntreinere din partea prinilor si, cu posibilitatea de a cere ntreinere n condiiile dreptului comun, urmnd ca dreptul su la ntreinere s renasc dac revine i i continu pregtirea colar sau urmeaz o form de calificare8. O problem care a determinat exprimarea mai multor opinii n literatura de specialitate a fost aceea de a ti dac prinii au obligaia de a ntreine minorul n situaia n care acesta nu realizeaz venituri dar dispune de bunuri proprii care ar putea fi vndute pentru a i se asigura ntreinerea. Astfel, unii autori9 au susinut c dac minorul nu realizeaz venituri el se afl n nevoie chiar i n cazul n care ar avea anumite bunuri. n susinerea acestei opinii se arat c, n raport de dispoziiile art. 107 alin. 1 i 2 Codul familiei care stabilesc c minorul este ntreinut de prinii si iar dac acesta nu are venituri ndestultoare prinii sunt datori s i asigure condiiile necesare pentru creterea, educarea i pregtirea sa profesional, nevoia copilului trebuie apreciat numai n funcie de veniturile acestuia nu i de bunurile din patrimoniul su. De asemenea, n argumentarea acestei opinii se susine c dac s-ar ngdui printelui s vnd bunurile copilului n scopul ntreinerii sale ar nsemna ca, pe de o parte, s i se recunoasc acestuia, n mod indirect, un drept cu privire la bunurile copilului ceea ce ar contraveni principiului independenei patrimoniale dintre printe i copil reglementat de art. 106 Codul familiei, iar pe de alt parte, s-i poat ndeplini obligaia de cretere a copilului care i revine din ocrotirea printeasc pe seama bunurilor minorului, ceea ce nu poate fi acceptat. ntr-o alt opinie s-a artat c n ipoteza n care minorul nu realizeaz venituri dar are bunuri prin a cror valorificare s-ar putea procura cele necesare traiului, se vor folosi pentru ntreinerea sa acele bunuri10. Ca argument n susinerea acestei opinii se invoc prevederile art. 127 alin. 2 Codul familiei care

the doctrine, it was expressed the opinion according to which the minor descendant who refuses to be educated by a type of education and to work, if he is old enough, or even who has an antisocial behaviour, such as vagrancy trends etc. should lose the right to be supported by his parents, having the possibility to demand support in the conditions of the common law, and his right to be supported will be born again if he recovers and continues his school training or if he goes to a type of qualification64. A problem that determined the expression of several opinions in the specialty literature was the one of knowing if the parents have the obligation to support the minor if he does not achieve incomes, but he has his own goods that could be sold in order to provide his support. Therefore, some authors65 have supported that, if the minor does not achieve incomes, he is in need even if he as certain goods. In supporting this opinion, it is shown that, reported to the stipulations of art. 107, paragraph 1 and 2 of Family Code that establish that the minor is supported by his parents and if they do not have enough incomes, the parents have to provide him the conditions necessary in order to raise, educate and professionally train him, the childs need must be appreciated only depending on his incomes, not on the goods of his patrimony. Also, by motivating this opinion, we may state that, if the parent is allowed to sell the childs goods in order to support him, it means, on one hand, to acknowledge his indirect right regarding the childs goods, fact that would contradict the principle of the patrimonial independence between parent and child regulated by art. 106 of Family Code, and on the other hand, to be able to accomplish his obligation to raise the child that belongs to him from the parental protection based on the minors goods, a situation that cannot be accepted. In another opinion, it was shown that, if the minor does not achieve incomes, but he has goods by whose capitalization we could provide the things necessary for the living, we may use those goods in order to support him66. As an argument in supporting this opinion, we invoke the stipulations of art. 127, paragraph 2

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

113

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

arat c n cazul minorului pus sub tutel cheltuielile necesare pentru ntreinerea acestuia i administrarea bunurilor sale se acoper din veniturile acestuia, prevederi care, potrivit art. 105 alin. 3 Codul familiei au aplicabilitate i n cazul minorului aflat sub ocrotire printeasc. Conform unui alt punct de vedere cruia ne altur, se susine c ambele opinii prezentate anterior dau o rezolvare mult prea rigid problemei (n sensul c potrivit primei opinii vnzarea bunurilor minorului pentru asigurarea ntreinerii sale nu este admis iar conform celei de-a doua opinii ntreinerea minorului urmeaz a fi acoperit din valoarea bunurilor sale i numai dac nu are bunuri va fi ndreptit s pretind ntreinere de la prinii si) ignorndu-se faptul c raportarea nevoii copilului minor la mijloacele materiale ale prinilor trebuie s se fac n aa fel nct s se realizeze un echilibru ntre nivelul lor de trai. Aadar, instanele judectoreti urmeaz s fac o analiz elastic a jocului celor dou variabile: nevoia minorului i mijloacele prinilor astfel nct nivelul de via al prinilor i al copilului s fie aproximativ acelai, fiind inechitabil ca minorul care are un anumit patrimoniu, eventual o avere considerabil, s primeasc ntreinere de la prinii si care nu ar avea alte venituri dect cele din munca prestat, dup cum la fel de injust i de neacceptat ar fi s se nstrineze de ctre prini bunurile copilului dac acestea ar fi nensemnate n raport cu mijloacele prinilor11. n cazul n care printele nu realizeaz venituri se ridic ntrebarea dac acesta va fi sau nu exonerat de plata pensiei de ntreinere. Codul familiei nu reglementeaz expres aceast problem astfel c rspunsul a fost dat de ctre practica judiciar care a fcut distincie ntre situaia n care lipsa veniturilor se datoreaz unor motive obiective i cea n care debitorul nu realizeaz venituri datorit propriei culpe. n primul caz, cnd debitorul obligaiei, dei capabil de munc nu realizeaz venituri datorit unor motive obiective cum sunt starea de boal sau efectuarea serviciului militar12, urmarea unei faculti la cursuri de zi13,

of Family Code that shows that, in case of the minor under guardianship, the expenditures needed in order to support him and to administrate his goods are covered by his incomes , stipulations that, according to art. 105, paragraph 3 of the Family Code have applicability also for the minor placed under parental protection. According to another viewpoint, it is stated that both the opinions previously presented give a very rigid solution to this problem (meaning that, according to the first opinion, selling the minors goods in order to provide his support is not admitted and, according to the second opinion, the minors support is to be covered by the value of his goods and only if he has no goods he will have the right to be supported by his parents) ignoring the fact that the report of the minor childs need to the parents material means must be done so that their living standards would be balanced. Therefore, the judicial courts are to make an elastic analysis of the game of the two variables: the minors need and the parents means so that the parents and the childs living standards would be approximately the same, being inequitable for the minor who has a certain patrimony, maybe even a significant fortune, to be supported by his parents who have no other incomes than the ones coming from the performed work and it would be also unfair and unacceptable to alienate the childs goods from the parents if those goods were insignificant in relation to the parents means67. If the parent does not achieve incomes, there appears the question whether it is exonerated from the payment of the supporting alimony. The Family Code does not expressly regulate this problem so that the answer was given by the judicial practice that made a distinction between the situation when the lack of incomes occurs due to certain objective reasons and the one when the debtor does not achieve incomes due to his own guilt. In the first case, when the debtor of the obligation, even if he is able to work, does not achieve incomes due to certain objective reasons such as the illness or the accomplishment of the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

114

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

executarea unei pedepse privative de libertate, cu excepia situaiei cnd pedeapsa a fost aplicat pentru infraciunea de abandon de familie14, acesta urmeaz a fi exonerat de plata pensiei de ntreinere. n cazul n care printele sau adoptatorul debitor al obligaiei de ntreinere, dei apt de munc, nu realizeaz venituri ntruct refuz s munceasc, ori i s-a desfcut contractul din munc pentru absene nemotivate, deci prin aplicarea unei sanciuni din motive ce i sunt imputabile, el nu va fi exonerat de obligaia legal de ntreinere. n aceste situaii s-a decis c obligarea debitorului la plata pensiei de ntreinere urmeaz a se dispune n raport de venitul minim pe economia naional15. De asemenea, venitul minim realizat pe economia naional a fost avut n vedere de ctre instanele judectoreti i n lipsa altor criterii de stabilire a posibilitilor materiale de care dispune debitorul16 (de exemplu dac la dosar nu exist probe din care s rezulte c acesta realizeaz venituri mai mari). Aceast soluie a instanelor judectoreti, dei n deplin concordan cu maxima jurisconsultului francez Loysel qui fait l`enfant doit le nourrir17, pare s adauge la lege ceea ce nu poate fi acceptat. n cazul n care debitorul, dei apt de munc i avnd posibilitatea s munceasc, nu realizeaz venituri din munc i nu are nici alte surse de venit care s aib caracter de continuitate ori bunuri care ar putea fi valorificate pentru a putea presta ntreinerea, ar trebui s se reglementeze expres c el continu s fie obligat la a presta ntreinere copilului, ntinderea acesteia urmnd s fie stabilit de instana de judecat n funcie de nivelul de trai al debitorului i avndu-se n vedere venitul minim stabilit pe economia naional. Dac mijloacele materiale ale prinilor nu sunt ndestultoare, la ntreinerea minorului pot fi obligai bunicii, att materni ct i paterni, acetia fiind n subsidiar inui deopotriv s acorde ntreinere nepotului lor18. Obligaia de ntreinere poate fi pus n sarcina bunicilor numai dac prinii fireti sau adoptivi nu dispun de mijloace materiale sau acestea sunt insuficiente din motive

military service68, going to the daily classes of a faculty69, executive a freedom privative punishment, except when the punishment was applied for the offence of abandoning the family70, he is to be exonerated from the payment of the supporting alimony. If the parent or the adopter who is the debtor of the supporting obligation, even if he is able to work, does not achieve incomes whereas he refuses to work, or his work contract was cancelled because of truancies, so by applying a sanction because of certain reasons that cannot be attributed to him, he will not be exonerated from the legal supporting obligation. In these situations, it was decided that the debtors obligation to pay the supporting alimony is to be disposed reported to the minimum income on the national economy71. Also, the minimum income on the national economy was considered by the judicial courts and in the absence of other criteria of establishing the debtors material possibilities72 (for example, if there are no evidences in the file to prove the fact that he achieves bigger incomes). This solution of the judicial courts, even if it totally agrees to the French lawyers maxim qui fait l`enfant doit le nourrir73, seems to add to the law something that cannot be accepted. If the debtor, even if he is able to work and he has the possibility to work, does not achieve incomes from work and he has no other sources of income that could have a continuity feature or goods that could be capitalized in order to perform the support, we should regulate expressly that he continues to be forced to perform the childs support, its extent being established by the judicial court depending on the debtors living standards and considering the minimum established income on the national economy. If the parents material means are not enough, both the maternal and paternal grandparents may be forced to support the minor, because they are subsidiarily kept to support their grandson74. The supporting obligation may belong to the grandparents only if the natural or adoptive parents do not have material means or if they are not enough

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

115

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

independente de voina lor, nu i atunci cnd prinii, dei capabili de munc, nu realizeaz venituri ntruct nu sunt ncadrai n munc19, i numai dac bunicii au posibiliti materiale de a o duce la ndeplinire20. n cazul n care prinii sau persoanele care au, potrivit legii, obligaia de ntreinere a copilului nu pot asigura, din motive independente de voina lor, satisfacerea nevoilor minime de locuin, hran, mbrcminte i educaie ale copilului, art. 45 alin. 2 din Legea nr. 272/2004 prevede obligaia statului ca, prin autoritile publice competente, s asigure acestora sprijin corespunztor sub form de prestaii financiare, prestaii n natur, precum i sub form de servicii, n condiiile legii. Prinii sunt obligai, conform art. 45 alin. 3 din lege, s solicite autoritilor competente acordarea alocaiilor, indemnizaiilor, prestaiilor n bani sau n natur i a altor faciliti prevzute de lege pentru copii sau pentru familiile de copii. 1.4. Obiectul obligaiei de ntreinere a copilului de ctre prini ntreinerea minorului de ctre prinii si are un obiect complex presupunnd acoperirea tuturor cheltuielilor pe care le implic realizarea dreptului copilului de a beneficia de un nivel de trai care s permit dezvoltarea sa fizic, mental, spiritual, moral sau social reglementat de art. 44 alin. 1 din Legea nr. 272/2004. Corelativ acestui drept al copilului prinilor (sau, dup caz, altor reprezentani legali) le revine n primul rnd responsabilitatea prevzut de art. 44 alin. 2 din lege, de a asigura, n limita posibilitilor, cele mai bune condiii de via necesare creterii i dezvoltrii copiilor; prinii sunt obligai s le asigure copiilor locuin, precum i condiiile necesare pentru cretere, educare, nvtur i pregtirea profesional. n consecin, obligaia de ntreinere a copilului minor de ctre prinii si are ca finalitate asigurarea mijloacelor materiale necesare acoperirii cheltuielilor legate de hran, mbrcminte, locuin, ngrijirea sntii, satisfacerea nevoilor social

because of certain reasons that do not depend on their will, not also when the parents, even if they are able to work, do not achieve incomes whereas they are not framed in work75, and only if the grandparents have the material possibilities for accomplishing this obligation76. If the parents or the persons who have, according to the law, the obligation to support the child cannot provide, because of certain reasons that do not depend on their will, the satisfaction of the childs minimum needs of lodgement, food, clothes and education, art. 45, paragraph 2 of Law no. 272/2004 stipulates the state obligation to provide them, by the competent public authorities, the corresponding support as financial performances, in kind and also as services, in the law conditions. The parents are forced, according to art. 45, paragraph 3 of the law to demand to the competent authorities to grant them alimonies, allowances, performances in money or in kind and other facilities stipulated by the law for children or for the families with children. 1.4. The Object of the Parents Obligation to Support the Child The minors support accomplished by his parents has a complex object, supposing the cover of all the expenditures implied by the accomplishment of the childs right to benefit from a living standard that could allow his physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development regulated by art. 44, paragraph 1 of Law no. 272/2004. Correlatively to this childs right, the parents (or, depending on the case, the other legal representatives) have in the first place the responsibility stipulated by art. 44, paragraph 2 of the law, to provide, in the limit of their possibilities, the best living conditions needed by the children in order to grow up and to develop; the parents are forced to provide to their children lodgement, and also the conditions needed by the children in order to grow up, to be educated, taught and professionally trained. As a consequence, the parents obligation to support their minor child has as an ending the providing of the material means needed in order to cover the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

116

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

culturale ale copilului precum i a oricror alte cheltuieli pe care le reclam creterea, educarea, nvtura i pregtirea profesional a acestuia. 1.5. Caracterul in solidum al obligaiei de ntreinere a copilului de ctre prini Obligaia de ntreinere a copilului de ctre prini este o obligaie in solidum acetia fiind obligai n comun la ntreinere, fiecare contribuind proporional cu mijloacele sale21. Fiecare printe poate fi urmrit pentru ntreaga ntreinere. Printele care ndeplinete integral obligaia are aciune n regres mpotriva celuilalt printe pentru partea ce i revine la ntreinere. 1.6. Data de la care se datoreaz ntreinerea n Codul familiei nu exist prevederi referitoare la data de la care se datoreaz ntreinerea. n tcerea legii, practica judiciar a consacrat regula c pensia de ntreinere se datoreaz de la data nregistrrii cererii de chemare n judecat, prezumndu-se c dac nu a cerut ntreinere, creditorul nu s-a aflat n nevoie22 pe aceast perioad ntruct dac i-ar fi fost necesar nimic nu l mpiedica s sesizeze de ndat instana judectoreasc. Aceast prezumie poate fi nlturat n cazul n care reclamantul va face dovada c ntrzierea introducerii aciunii nu i este imputabil lui ci debitorului23. Tot practica judiciar a decis c n cazul n care prinii nu sunt divorai iar locuina copilului se stabilete la unul dintre acetia, pensia de ntreinere urmeaz a se fixa din momentul n care s-a luat aceast msur i nu de la data introducerii aciunii deoarece pn la acea dat este de presupus c ambii prini au contribuit la ntreinerea copilului24. Dac prin rspunsul dat la interogatoriul luat n instan prtul a fost de acord s contribuie la ntreinerea minorului de la data despririi n fapt a soilor, ntreinerea trebuie acordat de la aceast dat25. Dac se desface cstoria pensia de

expenditures related to food, clothes, lodgement, health care, satisfying the childs social-cultural needs and also any other expenditures demanded by the childs raise, education, instruction and professional training. 1.5. The in solidum Feature of the Parents Obligation to Support the Child The parents obligation to support the child is an in solidum obligation because they are commonly forced to support him, each one contributing proportionally to his means77. Each parent can be followed for the entire support. The parent who accomplishes the whole obligation has a regressing action against the other parent for the part that belongs to him at the support. 1.6. The Date since the Support is Owed In Family Code, there are no stipulations referring to the date since the support is owed. In the law silence, the judicial practice has consecrated the rule according to which the supporting alimony is demanded since the registration of the petition that calls in judgement, presuming that, if he did not demand support, the creditor was not needy78 during this time whereas if he needed it, nothing could stop him from announcing immediately the judicial court. This presumption may be removed if the plaintiff proves that the delay of introducing the action cannot be attributed to him, but to the debtor79. The judicial practice also decided that, if the parents are not divorced and the childs lodgement is established at one of them, the supporting alimony is to be established since this measure was taken, not since introducing the action because until that date we suppose that both of the parents have contributed to the childs support80. If, by the answer given to the interrogatory in the court, the defendant agreed to contribute to the minors support since the actual separation of the husbands, the support must be granted since this date81. If the marriage is annulled, the supporting alimony will be granted since the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

117

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

ntreinere se va acorda de la data pronunrii hotrrii de divor rmase definitive26 iar nu de la data introducerii aciunii de divor cum au decis unele instane27, ntruct, aa cum s-a artat n literatura juridic, pe durata procesului de divor instana de judecat poate lua, n temeiul art. 6132 C. pr. civ., msuri vremelnice, prin ordonan preedinial i cu privire la obligaia de ntreinere28. n cazul copilului din afara cstoriei, dac pensia de ntreinere a fost cerut odat cu aciunea n stabilirea paternitii aceasta trebuie acordat de la data introducerii aciunii29. 1.7. Executarea obligaiei de ntreinere 1.7.1. Precizri privind executarea obligaiei de ntreinere n general n conformitate cu prevederile art. 93 alin. 1 Codul familiei obligaia de ntreinere se execut n natur sau prin plata unei pensii n bani. n alineatul 2 al aceluiai articol legiuitorul arat c felul i modalitile de executare se stabilesc de ctre instana de judecat, n raport de mprejurri. Executarea n natur a obligaiei de ntreinere se face prin asigurarea celor necesare traiului, inclusiv prin acoperirea cheltuielilor privind educaia, nvtura i pregtirea profesional a creditorului minor iar executarea prin plata unei pensii n bani presupune prestarea unei sume de bani creditorului la termenele fixate de instana judectoreasc. Dei prevederile Codului familiei se refer expres numai la aceste dou modaliti de executare a obligaiei de ntreinere n doctrin s-a artat c aceasta poate fi executat parte n natur, parte n bani30. 1.7.2. Executarea voluntar a ntreinerii n cazul vieii comune a prinilor cu copilul ntreinerea acestuia se nfptuiete voluntar i n cele mai multe situaii se execut n natur. Copilul beneficiaz de ntreinere prin faptul convieuirii cu prinii si, care, exercitnd ocrotirea printeasc, i

date of pronouncing the definitive divorce decision82, not since the date of introducing the divorce action, like certain courts have decided83, whereas, as it was shown in the juridical literature, during the divorce process, the judicial court may take temporary measures, based on art. 6132 C. Civil process, by presidential ordinance, related to the supporting obligation84. In case of the child outside the marriage, if the supporting alimony was demanded at the same time as the action of establishing the paternity, it must be granted since the date of introducing the action85. 1.7. Execution of the Supporting Obligation 1.7.1. Specifications regarding the Execution of the Supporting Obligation in General According to the stipulations of art. 93, paragraph 1 of Family Code the supporting obligation is executed in kind or by paying alimony. In paragraph 2 of the same article, the legislator shows that the way and the means of execution are established by the judicial court, in a circumstances report. The execution in kind of the supporting obligation is accomplished by providing the things necessary for living, inclusively by covering the expenditures related to the minor creditors education, instruction and professional training and the execution by paying alimony supposes the performance of a certain money amount to the creditor at the terms established by the judicial court. Even if the stipulations of the Family Code refer expressly only to these two means of executing the supporting obligation in the doctrine it was shown that this may be executed partially in kind, partially in money86. 1.7.2. Voluntary Execution of the Support In case of the common life of the parents and the child, his support is voluntarily accomplished and most of the times it is executed in kind. The child benefits from support by living with his parents who, by

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

118

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

asigur zilnic toate cele necesare existenei ngrijind de sntatea i dezvoltarea lui fizic, de educarea, nvtura i pregtirea lui profesional. Prinii se vor putea nvoii cu privire la ntreinerea datorat copilului. Aceast posibilitate a prinilor rezult din prevederile art. 107 alin. 3 Codul familiei care arat c n caz de nenelegere, ntinderea obligaiei de ntreinere datorat de prini minorului, felul i modalitile executrii precum i contribuia fiecruia dintre prini se vor stabili de ctre instana judectoreasc, cu ascultarea autoritii tutelare. 1.7.3. Executarea ntreinerii stabilit prin hotrre judectoreasc 1.7.3.1. Cazuri n care ntreinerea se stabilete prin hotrre judectoreasc. Dac n timpul convieuirii fireti a prinilor i copilului ntreinerea nu este prestat benevol sau dac lipsete comunitatea de via dintre prini i copil ntruct relaiile dintre prini sunt compromise, acetia fiind separai n fapt sau divorai, obligaia de ntreinere a copilului mbrac forma unei pensii alimentare. Aceeai este situaia i n cazul declarrii nulitii cstoriei sau stabilirii filiaiei copilului din afara cstoriei. n toate aceste cazuri n care ntreinerea minorului formeaz obiect de litigiu, aceasta se stabilete de ctre instana judectoreasc. 1.7.3.2. Sesizarea instanei. Pn la vrsta de 14 ani copilul i exercit dreptul la ntreinere mpotriva unuia dintre prini prin cellalt printe, sau mpotriva ambilor prini prin reprezentantul su legal, iar dup mplinirea acestei vrste dreptul la ntreinere se exercit de ctre minorul cu capacitate restrns de exerciiu cu ncuviinarea prealabil a printelui sau reprezentantului legal. Dac printele n ngrijirea cruia se afl copilul nu sesizeaz instana de judecat pentru realizarea dreptului acestuia la ntreinere n practica judiciar s-a decis c autoritatea tutelar are calitatea procesual de a introduce aciunea pentru obligarea celuilalt printe la plata pensiei de ntreinere pentru copil31. De asemenea, tot practica judiciar a statuat c i procurorul poate exercita o

exerting the parental protection, provide him every day the things necessary for his existence, taking care of his health, physical development, education, instruction and professional training. The parents can make an agreement regarding the support they owe to the child. This possibility of the parents results from the stipulations of art. 107, paragraph 3 of Family Code that shows that, if there is any disagreement, the extent of the parents supporting obligation for the child, the way and the means of the execution and also the contribution of each parent will be established by the judicial court, by listening to the guardian authority. 1.7.3. Execution of the Support established by Judicial Decision 1.7.3.1. Cases when the support is established by judicial decision. If, during the parents and the childs natural cohabitation, the support is not voluntarily performed or if the living community between parents and child is absent whereas the relationships between the parents are compromised, because they are actually separated or divorced, the childs supporting obligation is similar to alimony. The situation is the same when the marriage is declared as null or when establishing the filiation of the child outside the marriage. In all these cases where the minors support represents a litigation object, this is established by the judicial court. 1.7.3.2. Announcing the court. Until the age of 14, the child exerts his right to be supported against a parent by the other one, or against both of the parents by his legal representative, and after reaching this age, the right to be supported is exerted by the minor with a restraint ability of exertion with the prior agreement of the parent or of the legal representative. If the parent who is responsible for the child does not announce the judicial court regarding the achievement of his right to be supported, in the judicial practice it was decided that the guardian authority has the legal standing quality of introducing the action in order to force the other parent to pay the childs supporting alimony87. Also, the judicial practice

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

119

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

asemenea aciune32. Dac se desface cstoria, art. 42 alin. 3 Codul familiei prevede c instana judectoreasc va stabili contribuia fiecrui printe la cheltuielile de cretere, educare, nvtur i pregtire profesional a copiilor. Instana are obligaia de a se pronuna cu privire la fixarea contribuiei la ntreinere a prinilor chiar dac nu s-a cerut. Prevederile art. 42 alin. 3 Codul familiei sunt aplicabile i n cazul rencredinrii copilului, al declarrii nulitii cstoriei (art. 24 alin. 2 Codul familiei) i al stabilirii filiaiei copilului din afara cstoriei fa de ambii prini (art. 65 Codul familiei). 1.7.3.3. Instana competent. Aciunea pentru obligarea printelui la plata pensiei de ntreinere se poate soluiona att de ctre instana de la domiciliul prtului, aplicnduse regula general stabilit de art. 5 C. pr. civ., ct i de ctre instana de la domiciliul reclamantului, fiind aplicabile prevederile art. 10 pct. 7 C. pr. civ. potrivit crora n cererile fcute de ascendeni sau descendeni pentru pensie de ntreinere, este competent, n afar de instana de la domiciliul prtului, i instana domiciliului reclamantului. Aadar, reclamantul are posibilitatea s aleag ntre dou instane deopotriv competente (art. 12 C. pr. civ.). Sub aspect material competena aparine judectoriei (art. 1 pct. 1 C. pr. civ.). n cazul n care pensia de ntreinere se solicit odat cu desfacerea cstoriei instana competent se determin potrivit art. 607 C. pr. civ. n temeiul cruia cererea de divor este de competena judectoriei n circumscripia creia se afl cel din urm domiciliu comun al soilor. Dac soii nu au avut domiciliu comun sau dac nici unul dintre soi nu mai locuiete n circumscripia judectoriei n care se afl cel din urm domiciliu comun, judectoria competent este aceea n circumscripia creia i are domiciliul prtul iar cnd prtul nu are domiciliul n ar, este competent judectoria n circumscripia creia i are domiciliul reclamantul. Dac ntreinerea este solicitat n procesul de stabilire a paternitii copilului din

stated that the prosecutor may exert such an action, too88. If the marriage is annulled, art. 42, paragraph 3 of Family Code stipulates that the judicial court will establish each parents contribution to the expenditures for the childrens raise, education, instruction and professional training. The court has to pronounce regarding the establishment of the parents contribution to the support, even if it was not required. The stipulations of art. 42, paragraph 3 of Family Code are applicable also in case of re-entrusting the child, of declaring the annulment of the marriage (art. 24, paragraph 2 of Family Code) and of establishing the filiation of the child outside the marriage in relation to both of the parents (art. 65 of Family Code). 1.7.3.3. Competent court. The action for forcing the parent to pay the supporting alimony may be solved both by the court of the defendants residence, by applying the general rule established by art. 5 Civil Proceedings Code, and by the court of the plaintiffs residence, by applying the stipulations of art. 10 point 7 of Civil Proceedings Code according to which in the petitions made by the ascendants or the descendants for the supporting alimony, it is competent, beside the court of the defendants residence, also the court of the plaintiffs residence. Therefore, the plaintiff may choose between two courts equally competent (art. 12 of Civil Proceedings Code). From the material viewpoint, the competence belongs to the court of justice (art. 1 point 1 of Civil Proceedings Code). If the supporting alimony is demanded at the same time with the marriage annulment, the competent court is determined according to art. 607 of Civil Proceedings Code basin on which the divorce petition is framed in the competence of the court of justice in whose circumscription there is the last common lodgement of the husbands. If the husbands had no common lodgement or if none of the husbands lives in the circumscription of the court of justice where there is the last common lodgement, the competent court of justice is the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

120

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

afara cstoriei este competent s se pronune asupra cererii de ntreinere instana care soluioneaz aciunea n stabilirea paternitii, adic, din punct de vedere material este competent judectoria (art. 1 C. pr. civ.) iar din punct de vedere teritorial sunt aplicabile regulile nscrise n art. 5 C. pr. civ. fiind competent instana de la domiciliul prtului iar dac prtul are domiciliul n strintate sau nu are domiciliu cunoscut este competent instana reedinei sale din ar, i dac nici reedina acestuia nu este cunoscut, competena aparine instanei domiciliului sau reedinei reclamantului. Dispoziiile art. 5 C. pr. civ. sunt aplicabile i n cazul n care se stabilete pensia e ntreinere o dat cu desfiinarea cstoriei, fiind, de asemenea, sub aspect material, competent judectoria (art. 1 C. pr. civ.). 1.7.3.4. ntinderea obligaiei de ntreinere datorate de prini copiilor minori. n general, cuantumul ntreinerii se determin pe baza criteriilor prevzute de art. 94 alin. 1 Codul familiei care stabilete regula c ntreinerea este datorat potrivit cu nevoile celui care o cere i cu mijloacele celui care urmeaz a o plti. n cazul n care creditor al obligaiei de ntreinere este copilul ntinderea ntreinerii datorate acestuia de ctre printe sau adoptator se determin de ctre instan avndu-se n vedere criteriile stabilite de art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, respectiv pn la o ptrime din ctigul din munc pentru un copil, o treime pentru doi copii i o jumtate pentru trei sau mai muli copii. Aadar, dac, n general, ntinderea ntreinerii se stabilete n funcie de nevoia creditorului i n raport cu mijloacele debitorului, n situaia n care printele sau adoptatorul datoreaz ntreinere copilului ntinderea acesteia urmeaz a se determina n funcie de starea de nevoie a minorului i de posibilitile de plat ale debitorului analizate n funcie de ctigul su din munc, legea instituind anumite plafoane maxime pn la care se poate stabili pensia de ntreinere, innd seama de numrul de copii ce urmeaz a beneficia de acest drept, indiferent dac acetia sunt rezultai din aceeai cstorie, din cstorii diferite, din

one in whose circumscription there is the defendants lodgement and when the defendant does not live in the country, the competent court of justice is the one in whose circumscription there is the plaintiffs lodgement. If the support is required in the process of establishing the paternity of the child outside the marriage, the court competent to pronounce regarding the supporting demand is the one that solves the action of establishing the paternity, namely, from the material viewpoint, the court of justice is competent (art. 1 of Civil Proceedings Code) and from the territorial viewpoint, we may apply the rules registered in art. 5 of Civil Proceedings Code, being competent the court of the defendants residence and if the defendant lives abroad or if his residence is not known, the competent court is the one of his residence in the country and if his residence is not known either, the competence belongs to the court of the plaintiffs residence. The stipulations of art. 5 of Civil Proceedings Code are also applicable if we establish the supporting alimony at the same time with the marriage annulment, the court of justice being also competent, from the material viewpoint (art. 1 of Civil Proceedings Code). 1.7.3.4. The extent of the parents supporting obligation for the minor children. Generally, the supporting quantum is determined based on the criteria stipulated by art. 94, paragraph 1 of Family Code that establishes the rule according to which the support is owed according to the needs of the one who demands it and to the means of the one who is to pay it. If the child is the creditor of the supporting obligation, the extent of the support owed him by the parent or by the adopter is determined by the court, considering the criteria established by art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code, respectively until a quarter of the work earnings for a child, a third for two children and a half for three or several children. Therefore, if, in general, the extent of the support is established depending on the creditors need and in report to the debtors means, in the situation when the parent or the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

121

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

adopie33sau din afara cstoriei34. Cuantumului pensiei de ntreinere datorate copilului trebuie orientat spre maximul plafonului fixat de legiuitor atunci cnd debitorul obligaiei de ntreinere nu are i alte sarcini familiale deosebite35. Astfel, dac printele sau adoptatorul datoreaz ntreinere la trei sau mai muli copii cuantumul acesteia poate fi egal cu jumtate din ctigul su, ntinderea i durata acesteia urmnd a fi stabilite de ctre instan pentru fiecare copil n parte36. Dac pe lng cei trei sau mai muli copii debitorul mai are n ntreinere i un fost so ntinderea pensiei datorate fiecrui copil va fi mai mic ntruct, potrivit art. 41 alin. 3 ntreinerea datorat fostului so poate fi stabilit pn la o treime din venitul net din munc al celui obligat la plata ei i mpreun cu ntreinerea datorat copiilor nu poate depi jumtate din venitul net din munc al debitorului. n reglementare din Codul familiei legiuitorul a fixat un plafon maxim din ctigul din munc datorat ca pensie de ntreinere copilului fr a preciza ce se nelege printr-un asemenea ctig. n tcerea legii instanele judectoreti au decis c ntinderea ntreinerii trebuie stabilit innd cont de toate veniturile debitorului care au caracter de continuitate, adic att retribuia propriu-zis ct i sporul de vechime, indemnizaia de conducere sau alt venit permanent nu i de cele care au caracter ntmpltor37 cele pentru ore suplimentare, indemnizaiile de deplasare, de transferare, de concediere i n general sumele care nu au caracter permanent cum sunt i salariile compensatorii n cazul disponibilizrii debitorului pensiei38. De asemenea, instanele au artat c sporul cuvenit angajailor care lucreaz n condiii deosebite de munc nu se ia n considerare la calculul pensiei de ntreinere39. ntruct dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei se refer expres la ctigul din munc al printelui sau adoptatorului se pune problema dac mijloacele materiale n funcie de care se determin ntinderea obligaiei de

adopter owes support to the child, its extent is to be determined depending on the minors need and on the debtors possibilities to pay that are analysed depending on his work earnings, the law instituting certain maximum limits until which we may establish the supporting alimony, considering the number of children that are to benefit from this right, even if they come from the same marriage, from different marriages, from adoption89or from outside the marriage90. The quantum of the supporting alimony owed to the child must be directed towards the maximum of the limit established by the legislator when the debtor of the supporting obligation has no other special family tasks91. Thus, if the parent or the adopter has to support three or more children, the supporting quantum may be equal to half of his earnings, and its extent and time are to be established by the court for each child separately92. If, beside the three or several children, the debtor also has to support an ex-husband, the extent of the alimony owed to each child will be smaller whereas, according to art. 41, paragraph 3 the support owed to the ex-husband may be established until a third of the work net income of the one who is forced to pay it and together with the support owed to the children, it cannot cross half of the debtors work net income. In the regulation of the Family Code, the legislator established a maximum limit of the work earnings owed as a supporting alimony without specifying what we understand by such earnings. In the law silence, the judicial courts have decided that the extent of the support must be established by considering all the incomes of the debtor that have a continuity feature, namely both the proper retribution and the seniority rise, the leading allowance or any other permanent income, but not the ones having an accidental feature93 the ones for the overtime, the displacement allowances, the transferring ones, the firing ones and generally the amounts that do not have a permanent feature, such as the compensatory wages if the debtor of the alimony is fired94. Also, the courts have shown

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

122

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

ntreinere a copilului sunt limitate numai la venitul din munc al debitorului sau urmeaz a se aplica i n cazul ntreinerii minorului principiul general reglementat de art. 94 alin. 1 Codul familiei astfel nct, n funcie de mijloacele debitorului ntreinerii, cuantumul ntreinerii s poate trece peste limitele prevzute de art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei. ntr-o opinie s-a artat c i n cazul obligaiei de ntreinere a prinilor fa de copiii lor minori cuantumul ntreinerii se stabilete n raport cu totalitatea mijloacelor patrimoniale ale printelui respectiv iar dac acesta nu are alte venituri, dect ctigul din munc, plafonul maxim este acela artat de art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei40. ntr-o alt opinie se consider c din punct de vedere juridic este imposibil aplicarea n aceeai ipotez att a reglementrilor speciale (art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei) ct i a reglementrilor generale (art. 94 alin. 1 Codul familiei), reglementrile generale fiind folosite doar pentru a complini aspectele lacunare ale reglementrilor speciale i nu pentru a le nltura sau a le dubla, deoarece generalia lex specialibus non derogat i specialia generalibus derogant. Se susine n aceeai opinie c termenul ctiguri este folosit de legiuitor n art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei n sensul de venituri obinute din alte surse dect cele din munc iar termenul munc n sensul de venituri din munc, considerndu-se c, fa de folosirea alternativa celor doi termeni n acest text de lege, n ipoteza n care printele realizeaz venituri din ambele categorii, pensia de ntreinere va fi calculat numai n raport cu unul dintre cele dou elemente, fiind exclus cumularea lor. Cu alte cuvinte, spre deosebire de dreptul comun, pentru stabilirea acestei obligaii nu vor fi folosite toate mijloacele materiale ale debitorului, ci numai un element al acestora, adic fie numai veniturile din munc, fie numai veniturile din alte surse. De asemenea, se mai arat c, atta vreme ct obligaia de ntreinere ar fi raportat exclusiv la veniturile din munc, lipsa acestora ar face ca printele s fie considerat c nu

that the rise belonging to the employees working in special work conditions is not considered when calculating the supporting alimony95. Whereas the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code refer expressly to the parent or adopters work earnings, we may ask if the material means depending on which we determine the extent of the childs supporting obligation are limited only to the debtors work income or are to be applied also in case of supporting the minor, the general principle regulated by art. 94, paragraph 1 of Family Code so that, depending on the means of the supporting debtor, the supporting quantum may cross the limits stipulated by art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code. In a certain opinion, it was shown that also in case of the parents supporting obligation for their minor children, the supporting quantum is established in report to the totality of the respective parents patrimonial means and if he has no incomes than the work earnings, the maximum limit is the one shown by art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code96. In another opinion, it is considered that, from the juridical viewpoint, it is impossible to apply in the same hypothesis both the special regulations (art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code) and the general regulations (art. 94, paragraph 1 of Family Code), the general regulations being used only in order to complement the incomplete aspects of the special regulations and not to remove or double them, because generalia lex specialibus non derogat and specialia generalibus derogant. The same opinion states that the earnings term is used by the legislator in art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code meaning incomes obtained from other sources than the work ones and the work term meaning work incomes, considering that, comparing to the alternative use of the two terms in this law text, if the parent achieves both of the types of incomes, the supporting alimony will be calculated only reported to one of the two elements, excluding their accrual. In other words, unlike the common law, in order to establish this obligation we will

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

123

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

dispune de mijloacele necesare pentru obligarea la ntreinerea copilului, astfel c dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, anihileaz, n acest caz, dreptul copilului de a fi ntreinut, fiind contrare principiului nscris n art. 49 alin. 1 din Constituia Romniei republicat, conform cruia copiii i tinerii se bucur de un regim special de protecie n realizarea drepturilor lor, motiv pentru care se sugereaz ca, de lege ferenda, legiuitorul s abroge prevederile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei i s supun obligaia de ntreinere a copilului de ctre printe principiului stipulat de art. 94 alin.1 Codul familiei41. Asupra problemei n discuie s-a pronunat i Curtea Constituional atunci cnd a respins, n dou rnduri, excepia de neconstituionalitate a dispoziiilor art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei invocat n raport de art. 49 alin. 1 din Constituie, artnd, ntre altele, c art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei nu instituie nicio interdicie formal n ceea ce privete raportarea pensiei de ntreinere i la alte venituri dect cele din munc. Dimpotriv, stabilirea pensiei de ntreinere se poate face n funcie de orice venituri ale debitorului n temeiul prevederilor art. 94 alin. 1 i 2 Codul familiei potrivit crora ntreinerea este datorat potrivit cu nevoia celui care o cere i cu mijloacele celui ce urmeaz a o plti iar instana judectoreasc va putea mri sau micora obligaia de ntreinere sau hotr ncetarea ei, dup cum se schimb mijloacele celui care d ntreinerea sau nevoia celui care o primete. n cazul n care debitorul obligaiei realizeaz i alte categorii de venituri, nu vor opera limitele instituite prin alin. 3 al art. 94 Codul familiei care i vor gsi aplicare exclusiv n cazul n care pensia de ntreinere este stabilit prin raportare numai la ctigul din munc al acestuia, instana fiind suveran n a determina cuantumul acesteia n funcie de situaia de fapt42. n ceea ce ne privete considerm c dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei se refer la veniturile pe care debitorul le realizeaz exclusiv din munca sa, nu i la

not use all the debtors material means, but only an element of theirs, namely either only the work incomes, or only the incomes from other sources. Also, it is shown that, as long as the supporting obligation is reported exclusively to the work incomes, their absence makes the parent to be considered as he does not have the means needed in order to be forced to support the child, so that the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code annihilates in this case the childs right to be supported, being contrary to the principle registered in art. 49, paragraph 1 in the republished Romanian Constitution according to which the children and the young people enjoy a special protection system in accomplishing their rights, reason for which it is suggested, de lege ferenda, for the legislator to abrogate the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code and to submit toe parents obligation to support the child to the principle stipulated by art. 94, paragraph 1 of Family Code97. Regarding the discussed problem, the Constitutional Court pronounced when it rejected twice the non-constitutionality exception of the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code invoked in report to art. 49, paragraph 1 of the Constitution, showing, among other things, that art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code institutes no formal interdiction related to the report of the supporting alimonies to other incomes than the work ones. On the contrary, the establishment of the supporting alimony can be made depending on any incomes of the debtor based on the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 1 and 2 of Family Code according to which the support is owed proportionally to the need of the one who demands it and to the means of the one who will pay it and the judicial court will be able to increase or decrease the supporting obligation or to decide its cessation, depending on the change of the means of the one who gives the support or the need of the one who receives it. If the debtor of the obligation accomplishes other income categories, the limits instituted by paragraph 3 of art. 94 of Family Code will not operate, limits that will be

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

124

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

veniturile provenite din alte surse, ntruct dac ar fi avut n vedere i alte posibiliti materiale ale acestuia n afara ctigului din munc legiuitorul ar fi prevzut aceasta n mod expres folosind formularea mijloacele celui ce urmeaz a o plti pe care o utilizeaz atunci cnd stabilete n art. 94 alin. 1 Codul familiei regula general n funcie de care se determin ntinderea ntreinerii. Faptul c legiuitorul a avut n vedere exclusiv ctigurile pe care printele sau adoptatorul le obine fiind ncadrat n munc rezult i din prevederile art. 41 alin. 3 teza final Codul familiei care arat c ntreinerea datorat fostului so mpreun cu ntreinerea datorat copiilor nu va putea depi jumtate din venitul net din munc al celui obligat la plata. Aceasta nu nseamn ns c ntinderea ntreinerii trebuie determinat numai n raport de venitul din munc al debitorului obligaiei, ci instana trebuie s stabileasc pensia de ntreinere n raport de nevoile reale ale copilului pe care trebuie s le coreleze cu mijloacele prinilor, innd seama, dac nevoile minorului impun aceasta i de alte surse de venit ale printelui sau adoptatorului obligat la ntreinere. 1.7.3.5. Modificarea ntinderii ntreinerii. Hotrrea judectoreasc avnd ca obiect stabilirea pensiei de ntreinere este exceptat de la principiul autoritii de lucru judecat. ntinderea ntreinerii datorate de prini copilului va putea fi mrit sau micorat, conform art. 94 alin. 2 Codul familiei, dac se schimb mijloacele celui care d ntreinerea sau nevoia celui care o primete. Pentru modificarea cuantumului ntreinerii nu este necesar s se schimbe att mijloacele debitorului ct i nevoia creditorului, fiind suficient s intervin modificri n ceea ce privete unul dintre cele dou elemente n funcie de care ntreinerea se stabilete43. n practica judiciar s-a decis c naterea unui nou copil constituie o mprejurare de natur a influena asupra mijloacelor de trai ale celui care d ntreinere avnd drept consecin modificarea plafonului pensiei de ntreinere44. De asemenea, n

applied exclusively if the supporting alimony is established by reporting only to his work earnings, the court being sovereign in determining its quantum depending on the actual situation98. Regarding us, we consider that the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code refer to the incomes the debtor achieves exclusively by his work, not to the incomes coming from other sources whereas if he considered other material possibilities of his beside the work earnings, the legislators would expressly stipulate this by using the wording the means of the one who will pay it that he only uses when establishing in art. 94, paragraph 1 of Family Code the general rule depending on which it is determined the supporting extent. The fact that the legislator considered exclusively the earnings the parent or the adopter obtains by being framed in work also results from the stipulations of art. 41, paragraph 3 of the final thesis of Family Code that shows that the support owed to the exhusband together with the support owed to the children will not be able to cross half of the work net income of the one forced to pay. This does not mean that the supporting extent must be determined only in report to the work income of the debtor of the obligation, but the court must establish the supporting alimony in report to the childs real needs that he has to correlate to the parents means, considering if the minors needs impose that and also considering other income sources of the parent or of the adopter forced to support. 1.7.3.5. Changing the supporting extent. The judicial decision having as an object the establishment of the supporting alimony is excerpted from the authority principle of a judged object. The extent of the support owed to the child by the parents will be able to be increased or decreased, according to art. 94, paragraph 2 of Family Code, if the means of the one who gives the support or the need of the one who receives it changes. In order to change the supporting quantum, it is not necessary to change both the debtors means and the creditors need, being enough to interfere

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

125

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

practic s-a stabilit c este ntemeiat cererea de majorare a cuantumului pensiei de ntreinere formulat de copil prin reprezentantul su legal, atunci cnd situaia material a debitorului s-a schimbat considerabil urmare a primirii unei importante sume de bani ca despgubire pentru un accident de circulaie suferit de acesta45. Nu mprtim acest punct de vedere ntruct sumele de bani ncasate cu titlu de indemnizaie de asigurare sau despgubire pentru pagubele pricinuite persoanei sunt destinate s repare pagube exclusiv personale, s refac, dac mai este posibil, capacitatea de munc, sau s asigure existena persoanei care nu mai este capabil de a muncii, astfel c nu pot fi folosite pentru ntreinerea altei persoane. Creditorul va putea cere majorarea cuantumului ntreinerii dac nevoile acestuia au crescut, chiar dac la data stabilirii pensiei aceasta era ndestultoare. Majorarea cuantumului pensiei de ntreinere are loc de la data introducerii cererii, excepie fcnd situaia cnd ntrzierea introducerii cererii se datoreaz culpei debitorului iar reducerea acesteia are loc de la data ivirii cauzei care a justificat admiterea aciunii46. 1.8. ncetarea obligaiei de ntreinere Obligaia de ntreinere acordat minorului de ctre printe nceteaz prin ajungerea acestuia la majorat, iar nainte de mplinirea vrstei majoratului prin cstoria minorului n condiiile legii. Dup mplinirea vrstei majoratului copilul mai poate pretinde ntreinere doar dac i continu studiile47. Dreptul la ntreinere al copilului major care i continu studiile ntr-o form de nvmnt organizat potrivit legii nu este reglementat de ctre Codul familiei. n tcerea legii, Plenul fostului Tribunal Suprem a statuat, prin decizie de ndrumare, c printele este obligat s dea ntreinere copilului devenit major, dac se afl n continuare de studii, pn la terminarea acestora, fr a depi vrsta de 25 de ani48. Dac datorit studiilor pe care le frecventeaz copilul are posibilitatea

changes regarding one of the two elements depending on which the support is established99. In the judicial practice, it was decided that the birth of a new child consists a circumstance able to have influence on the living standards of the one who gives support, having as a consequence the change of the supporting alimony limit100. Also, in the practice it was established that it is accomplished the demand of increasing the quantum of the supporting alimony formulated by the child by means of his legal representative when the debtors material situation is changed significantly as a consequence of receiving an important money amount as a compensation for a traffic accident suffered by him101. We do not share this viewpoint whereas the money amounts cashed as supporting or compensating allowances for the damage caused to the person are meant to repair exclusively personal damage, to recover, if it is possible, the work ability or to provide the existence of the person who is not able to work anymore, so that they cannot be used in order to support another person. The creditor will be able to ask for the increase of the supporting quantum if his needs increase, even if when establishing the alimony, it was enough. The increase of the supporting allowance quantum occurs since the date of introducing the demand, except for the situation when the delay of introducing the demand is because the debtors guilt and its reduction occurs since the date of appearing the cause that justified the admission of the action102. 1.8. Cessation of the Supporting Obligation The parents obligation to support the minor stops when he reaches his full age and before reaching the full age by the minors marriage in the law conditions. After reaching the full age, the child can ask for support only if he continues his studies103. The right to be supported of the major child who continues his studies in an education institution organized according to the law is not regulated by the Family Code. In the law silence, the Plenum of the ex Supreme Court stated, by a guiding

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

126

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

s obin venituri, acesta nu este ndreptit la ntreinere. ntr-o atare situaie se afl majorul care urmeaz cursurile la forma de nvmnt fr frecven i care nu este obligat s mearg n fiecare zi la facultate49. Copilul devenit major i aflat n continuare de studii trebuie s cear, printr-o nou aciune, obligarea printelui la plata pensiei de ntreinere, ntruct hotrrea prin care printele a fost obligat la ntreinerea copilului minor i nceteaz efectele n mod automat la mplinirea de ctre acesta a vrstei de 18 ani50. n temeiul art. 94 alin. 2 Codul familiei, instana judectoreasc poate decide ncetarea plii ntreinerii dac dispare nevoia creditorului obligaiei de ntreinere sau dac debitorul nu mai are mijloacele necesare pentru plata ei. n practica judiciar s-a decis c poate fi sistat plata pensiei de ntreinere dac minorul s-a ncadrat n munc realiznd venituri proprii din care se poate ntreine51. De asemenea, instanele au hotrt sistarea plii pensiei de ntreinere n cazul n care debitorul a devenit incapabil de munc astfel c nu mai realizeaz venituri nici pentru propria ntreinere sau se afl la studii ori n curs de satisfacere a stagiului militar sau de executare a unei pedepse privative de libertate, afar de cazul n care a fost condamnat pentru infraciunea de abandon de familie52. Obligaia de a ntreine copilul mai poate nceta, atunci cnd debitor al acesteia este tatl, dac acesta tgduiete cu succes paternitatea copilului. ntruct admiterea aciunii n tgada paternitii produce efecte retroactive din momentul naterii copilului n literatura juridic s-a ridicat ntrebarea dac pensia de ntreinere prestat anterior tgduirii paternitii de ctre soul sau fostul so al mamei este sau nu supus restituirii, conturndu-se dou opinii. ntr-o opinie, pe care o acceptm, se arat c pensia de ntreinere prestat anterior tgduirii paternitii este supus restituirii invocndu-se ca temei juridic plata nedatorat, dac restituirea se cere de la copil sau mbogirea fr just cauz dac se cere de la mama copilului ori de la cel care avea obligaia de ntreinere53. A doua opinie

decision, that the parent was forced to support the major child if he continues his studies, until he finishes them, without crossing the age of 25104. If, because of the studies he attends, the child has the possibility to obtain incomes, he has no right to be supported. In such a situation is placed the major child who goes to the classes of an extramural educational institution and who is not forced to go to classes every day105. The major child who continues his studies must ask, by a new action, his parent to pay his supporting alimony whereas the decision by means of which the parent was forced to support his minor child automatically stops its effects when he reaches the age of 18106. Based on art. 94, paragraph 2 of Family Code, the judicial court may decide the cessation of the supporting payment if the creditors need to be supported disappears or if the debtor has no means needed in order to pay it anymore. In the judicial practice, it was decided that we could cease the payment of the supporting alimony if the minor was framed in work and he accomplished his own incomes by means of which he could support himself107. Also, the courts have decided to cease the payment of the supporting alimony if the debtor has become unable to work so that he could not accomplish incomes for his own support either or if he studied or if he satisfied his military stage or if he executed a freedom privative punishment, beside the case when he was convicted for the offence of abandoning the family108. The obligation to support the child may also stop when its debtor is the father, if he successfully denies the childs paternity. Whereas the admission of the action when denying the paternity produces retroactive effects since the child is born, the juridical literature raised the question whether the supporting alimony performed before the mothers husband or ex-husband denied is submitted to the restitution, outlining two opinions. In an opinion accepted by us it is shown that the supporting alimony performed before denying the paternity is submitted to the restitution, invoking as a juridical basis the nonowed payment, if the restitution is demanded

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

127

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

from the child or the enrichment with no fair cause if it is demanded from the childs mother or from the one who had the supporting obligation109. The second opinion states that the performed supporting alimony is not submitted to the restitution whereas it is about an obligation II. Obligaia de ntreinere dintre with successive performance and until removing the paternity presumption, the mothers husband prini i copil n sistemul noului Cod civil has the legal supporting obligation110. 2.1. Reglementare La fel ca i n reglementarea din Codul II. The Supporting Obligation familiei legiuitorul se refer n noul Cod civil la between Parents and Child in the System of obligaia prinilor de a ntreine copilul att n the New Civil Code Titlul V Obligaia de ntreinere artnd n art. 516 care reglementeaz subiectele obligaiei de 2.1. Regulation ntreinere c aceasta exist i ntre rudele n Like in the regulation of the Family linie dreapt inclusiv cele rezultate din adopie Code, the legislator refers in the new Civil Code (art. 516 alin. 1 i 2 din noul Cod civil) ct i n to the parents obligation to support the child capitolul dedicat ocrotirii printeti, mai exact n both in Title V The Supporting Obligation, art. 499 din noul Cod civil, stabilind n alineatul showing in art. 516 that regulates the subjects of 1 al acestui articol c tatl i mama sunt obligai, the supporting obligation that it exists also n solidar, s dea ntreinere copilului lor minor, between the straight line relatives, including the asigurndu-i cele necesare traiului, precum i ones resulted from adoption (art. 516, paragraph educaia, nvtura i pregtirea sa profesional. 1 and 2 of the new Civil Code) and in the chapter dedicated to the parental protection, more specifically in art. 499 of the new Civil Code, 2.2. Condiii de existen Prevederile noului Cod civil consacr establishing in the first paragraph of this article regula c are drept la ntreinere cel care se afl that the father and the mother are solidarily n nevoie, neputndu-se ntreine din munca sa forced to support their minor child, providing the ori din bunurile sale (art. 524). Condiia strii de things necessary for his living, and also for his nevoie este reglementat i n ceea ce l privete education, instruction and professional training. pe minor pentru ca acesta s poat cere ntreinere de la prinii si, numai c art. 525 2.2. Living Conditions The stipulations of the new Civil Code alin. 1 din noul Cod civil arat c minorul se afl n nevoie dac nu se poate ntreine din munca consecrate the rule according to which the one sa chiar dac ar avea bunuri. Aceast prevedere who has the right to be supported is the one in din art. 525 alin. 1 din noul Cod civil reprezint need, being unable to support himself from his un element de noutate n raport de dispoziiile work or from his goods (art. 524). The condition Codului familiei avnd menirea de a pune capt of the needy status is also regulated regarding the disputelor doctrinare n legtur cu posibilitatea minor so that he could ask their parents for vnzrii bunurilor minorilor cu scopul asigurrii support, but art. 525, paragraph 1 of the new ntreinerii acestuia. Numai n cazul n care Civil Code shows that the minor is in need if he prinii n-ar putea presta ntreinerea fr a-i is not able to support himself from his work, primejdui propria lor existen, instana de tutel even if he has goods. This stipulation of art. 525, poate ncuviina ca ntreinerea s se asigure prin paragraph 1 of the new Civil Code represents a valorificarea bunurilor pe care acesta le are, cu new element reported to the possibility of selling excepia celor de strict necesitate (525 alin. 2 the minors goods in order to provide his support. Only if the parents are not able to din noul Cod civil).
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

susine c pensia de ntreinere prestat nu este supus restituirii ntruct este vorba despre o obligaie cu prestare succesiv iar pn la nlturarea prezumiei de paternitate soul mamei are obligaia legal de ntreinere54.

128

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

Starea de nevoie a minorului poate fi dovedit prin orice mijloc de prob (art. 528 din noul Cod civil ). Le fel ca i prevederile Codului familiei (art. 107 alin. 2), dispoziiile noului Cod civil reglementeaz obligaia prinilor de a-i asigura copilului condiiile necesare pentru creterea, educarea i pregtirea sa profesional chiar i n situaia n care acesta ar avea un venit propriu, dar care nu este ndestultor. Ca noutate, legiuitorul reglementeaz n noul Cod civil alturi de condiia strii de nevoie i pe aceea ca persoana care solicit pensia de ntreinere s fi avut un comportament corespunztor regulilor de convieuire social fa de debitor pentru a putea pretinde ntreinere de la acesta. n acest sens art. 526 alin. 1 din noul Cod civil prevede c nu poate pretinde ntreinere acela care s-a fcut vinovat fa de cel obligat la ntreinere de fapte grave, contrare legii sau bunelor moravuri. ntruct prevederile textului citat nu fac nicio distincie ele urmeaz a se aplica i creditorului minor care cere ntreinere de la prinii si. Legiuitorul nu arat nici mcar cu titlu de exemplu care sunt faptele de natur s-l decad pe creditor din dreptul la ntreinere, limitndu-se doar s instituie condiia ca acestea s fie grave, contrare legii i bunelor moravuri. Rmne aadar ca instana de tutel s decid dac, n raport de natura faptelor de care se face vinovat, creditorul obligaiei de ntreinere pierde sau nu dreptul la ntreinere. n ceea ce ne privete considerm c acesta poate pierde dreptul la ntreinere n cazul comiterii fa de debitor a unor fapte de natur s atrag nedemnitatea succesoral55 precum tentativa de omor sau alte fapte grave de violen fizic sau moral svrite cu intenie, precum i n cazul comiterii unor fapte care, potrivit prevederilor noului Cod Civil justific desfacerea adopiei, respectiv a unor fapte penale pedepsite cu o pedeaps privativ de libertate de cel puin 2 ani (art. 477 alin. 1). Spre deosebire de Codul familiei, noul Cod civil conine prevederi care stabilesc c poate fi obligat la ntreinere numai cel care are mijloacele pentru a o plti sau are posibilitatea de a dobndi aceste mijloace (art. 527 alin. 1).

support him without endangering their own existence, the guardian court may allow the support to be provided by the capitalization of his goods, except for the strictly necessary ones (525, paragraph 2 of the new Civil Code). The minors needy status may be proved by any evidence means (art. 528 of the new Civil Code). Like the stipulations of the Family Code (art. 107, paragraph 2), the stipulations of the new Civil Code regulate the parents obligation to provide to the child the conditions needed in order to raise, educate and professionally train him, even if he has his own income that is not enough. As a new element, the legislator also regulates in the new Civil Code, next to the condition of the needy status, the one when the person that demands the supporting alimony to had had behaviour according to the rules of social cohabitation in relation to the debtor in order to be able to ask for his support. In this sense art. 526, paragraph 1 of the new Civil Code stipulates that the one who cannot demand to be supported is the one who is guilty in front of the one who was forced to support by serious actions against the law or against the good manners. Whereas the stipulations of the quoted text make no difference, they are to be applied also to the minor creditor that asks his parents to support him. The legislator does not show, not even as examples, the facts able to decline the creditor from his right to be supported, being limited at instituting the condition according to which they have to be serious, against the law and the good manners. Thus, the guardian court will decide whether, in relation to the nature of the facts that make him guilty, the creditor of the supporting obligation loses the right to be supported. Regarding us, we consider that he may lose the right to be supported if he accomplishes in front of the debtor certain facts able to attract the successional indignity111 and also the murder attempt or other serious facts of physical or moral violence deliberately accomplished and also in case of committing certain facts that, according to the stipulations of the new Civil Code, justify the annulment of the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

129

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

La stabilirea mijloacelor debitorului se ine seama de veniturile i bunurile acestuia, precum i de posibilitile de realizare a acestora (art. 527 alin. 2). De asemenea, ntruct legiuitorul se refer i la posibilitatea de realizare a mijloacelor necesare prestrii ntreinerii, va putea fi obligat la plata acesteia i debitorul care, dei apt de munc i avnd posibilitatea s munceasc, nu realizeaz venituri din munc i nu are nici alte surse de venit care s aib caracter de continuitate, ori bunuri care s poat fi valorificate pentru a presta ntreinere. ntr-o astfel de situaie ar trebui s se prevad c ntinderea ntreinerii va fi stabilit de instan n raport de nivelul de trai al debitorului i avnd n vedere venitul minim stabilit pe economia naional56. 2.3. Cuantumul ntreinerii Similar reglementrii din Codul familiei n sistemul noului Cod Civil cuantumul ntreinerii se determin, n general, n funcie de nevoia celui care o cere i de mijloacele celui care urmeaz a o plti (art. 529 alin. 1). Atunci cnd ntreinerea este datorat de printe, ntinderea acesteia se determin n funcie de criteriile reglementate de art. 529 alin. 2 din noul Cod civil, respectiv pn la o ptrime din venitul su lunar net pentru un copil, o treime pentru doi copii i o jumtate pentru trei sau mai muli copii. Se observ c legiuitorul nu se mai refer expres la ctigul din munc al printelui ci la venitul su lunar net, astfel c la stabilirea ntinderii ntreinerii se vor avea n vedere att venitul din munc al debitorului ct i celelalte venituri cu caracter permanent pe care acesta le realizeaz lunar. i n reglementarea din noul Cod civil dispoziiile art. 499 alin. 4 las prinilor posibilitatea de a se nelege n privina ntinderii ntreinerii pe care sunt datori s o presteze copilului iar n caz de nenelegere prevederile aceluiai articol arat c ntinderea ntreinerii, precum i contribuia fiecrui printe la ntreinerea acestuia, felul i modalitile de executare se stabilesc de ctre instana tutelar pe baza raportului de anchet psihosocial. Cuantumul ntreinerii datorate copiilor,

adoption, respectively of certain criminal facts punished by a freedom privative punishment of at least 2 years (art. 477, paragraph 1). Unlike the Family Code, the new Civil Code contains stipulations stating that the one that can be forced to support is only the one who has the means to pay it or the possibility to achieve these means (art. 527, paragraph 1). When establishing the debtors means, we also consider his incomes and goods and the possibilities to achieve them (art. 527, paragraph 2). Also, whereas the legislator refers to the possibility to accomplish the means needed in order to perform the support, he will be forced to pay it and the debtor who, even if he is able to work and he has possibility to work, does not achieve work incomes and has no other income sources having a continuous feature, or goods that could be capitalized in order to perform support. In such a situation, we should stipulate that the support extent will be established by the court in report to the debtors living standards and considering the minimum established income on the national economy112. 2.3. The Support Quantum Like the regulation of the Family Code in the system of the new Civil Code, the support quantum is generally determined depending on the need of the one who asks for it and on the means of the one who will pay it (art. 529, paragraph 1). When the support is owed by the parent, its extent is determined depending on the criteria regulated by art. 529, paragraph 2 of the new Civil Code, respectively to a quarter of his monthly net income for one child, a third for two children and a half for three or several children. We may notice that the legislator does not refer expressly to the parents work income anymore, but to his monthly net income, so that, when establishing the support extent, we will consider both the debtors work income and the other incomes having a permanent feature that his accomplishes per month. Also in the regulation of the new Civil Code, the stipulations of art. 499, paragraph 4 leaves to the parents the possibility to make an agreement regarding the support extent that they

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

130

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

mpreun cu ntreinerea datorat altor persoane, potrivit legii, nu poate depi jumtate din venitul net lunar al celui obligat (art. 529 alin. 3 din noul Cod civil).

2.4. Data de la care se datoreaz ntreinerea Spre deosebire de Codul familiei care nu conine prevederi referitoare la data de la care se datoreaz ntreinerea, n noul Cod civil data de la care se datoreaz ntreinerea este reglementat expres de dispoziiile art. 532 care arat c pensia de ntreinere se datoreaz de la data cererii de chemare n judecat (art. 532 alin. 1) ns poate fi acordat i pentru o perioad 2.4. The Date since the Support is anterioar dac introducerea cererii de chemare Owed Unlike the Family Code that does not n judecat a fost ntrziat din culpa debitorului contain stipulations referring to the date since the (art. 532 alin. 2). support is owed, in the new Civil Code, the date 2.5. Executarea obligaiei de since the support is owed is expressly regulated by the stipulations of art. 532 that shows that the ntreinere n reglementarea noului Cod Civil supporting alimony is owed since the date of the obligaia de ntreinere se poate executa n petition to call to judgement (art. 532, paragraph 1) but it may also be granted for a previous time natur sau prin plata unei pensii n bani. Potrivit art. 530 alin. 1 din noul Cod period if the introduction of the petition to call to civil obligaia de ntreinere se execut n natur, judgement was delayed because of the debtor prin asigurarea celor necesare traiului i, dup (art. 532, paragraph 2). caz, a cheltuielilor pentru educare, nvtur i pregtire profesional. Dac obligaia de 2.5. Execution of the Support ntreinere nu se execut de bun voie, n natur, Obligation In the regulation of the new Civil Code, alineatul 2 al aceluiai articol prevede c instana de tutel dispune executarea ei prin the support obligation may be executed in kind plata unei pensii de ntreinere, stabilit n bani. or by paying alimony. According to art. 530, paragraph 1 of the n conformitate cu prevederile art. 533 alin. 1 din noul Cod civil pensia de ntreinere new Civil Code, the supporting obligation is se pltete n rate periodice, la termenele executed in kind, by providing the things convenite de pri sau, n lipsa acordului lor, la necessary for the living and, depending on the case, the expenditures for education, instruction cele stabilite prin hotrre judectoreasc. Un element de noutate pe care l aduce and professional training. If the supporting noul Cod civil fa de prevederile Codului obligation is not voluntarily executed in king, familiei, este acela c art. 533 alin. 3 d paragraph 2 of the same article stipulates that the posibilitatea prilor, sau, dac exist motive guardian court disposes its execution by paying a temeinice, instanei de tutel, de a conveni, supporting alimony established in money. According to the stipulations of art. 533, respectiv de a hotr ca ntreinerea s se execute prin plata anticipat a unei sume globale paragraph 1 of the new Civil Code, the care s acopere nevoile de ntreinere ale celui supporting alimony is paid in periodical ndreptit pe o perioad mai ndelungat sau pe instalments, at the terms established by the ntreaga perioad n care se datoreaz parties or, in the absence of their agreement, at
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

owe to the child and, if they cannot make this agreement, the stipulations of the same article show that the support extent and also each parents contribution to his support, the way and the means of execution are established by the guardian court based on the report of the psychosocial investigation. The quantum of the support owed to the children, together with the support owed to other persons, according to the law, cannot cross half of the monthly net income of the person who is forced to pay (art. 529, paragraph 3 of the new Civil Code).

131

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

ntreinerea n msura n care debitorul the ones established by the judicial decision. A new element brought by the new Civil ntreinerii are mijloacele necesare acoperirii Code to the stipulations of the Family Code is acestei obligaii. that art. 533, paragraph 3 gives the possibility to 2.6. Modificarea i ncetarea the parties or, if there are serious reasons, to the guardian court, to agree, respectively to decide pensiei de ntreinere n temeiul art. 531 alin. 1 din noul Cod for the support to be executed by the anticipated civil instana de tutel poate mri sau micora payment of a global amount that should cover pensia de ntreinere, sau poate hotr ncetarea the supporting needs of the one who has to right plii ei, potrivit mprejurrilor, dac se ivete o to it for a longer lapse of time or for the entire schimbare n ceea ce privete mijloacele celui time of the support to the extent where the debtor care presteaz ntreinerea i nevoia celui care o of the support has the means needed in order to cover this obligation. primete. Din interpretarea restrictiv a acestui articol s-ar putea trage concluzia c modificarea 2.6. Change and Cessation of the ntreinerii este posibil dac cele dou condiii Support Alimony Based on art. 531, paragraph 1 of the privitoare la modificarea mijloacelor debitorului i la modificarea nevoilor creditorului sunt new Civil Code, the guardian court may increase ndeplinite cumulativ, spre deosebire de or decrease the supporting alimony or may dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 2 Codul familiei care decide the cessation of its payment, according to reglementeaz posibilitatea instanei de a mri the circumstances, if there appears a change sau micora cuantumul ntreinerii dac s-au regarding the means of the one who performs the schimbat fie mijloacele celui care d support and the need of the one who receives it. From the restrictive interpretation of this ntreinerea, fie nevoia celui care o primete. Nu credem ns c voina legiuitorului a fost aceea article, we may conclude that the change of the ca ambele condiii s fie ndeplinite pentru a fi support is possible if the two conditions posibil modificarea ntinderii ntreinerii ci regarding the change of the debtors means and admitem posibilitatea strecurrii unei erori n the change of the creditors needs are formularea textului articolului 531 alin. 1 din cumulatively accomplished, unlike the noul Cod civil. n consecin, credem c pentru stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 2 of Family modificarea cuantumului ntreinerii este Code that regulates the court possibility to suficient s intervin modificri n ceea ce increase or decrease the support quantum if there privete unul dintre cele dou elemente n was a change in the means of the one who gives the support or in the need of the one who funcie de care se stabilete ntreinerea. Un element de noutate pe care noul Cod receives it. But we do not think that the civil l aduce n privina modificrii ntinderii legislators will was for both conditions to be ntreinerii este acela c se prevede expres c accomplished in order to make possible the pensia de ntreinere stabilit ntr-o sum fix se change of the support extent, but we admit the indexeaz de drept, trimestrial, n funcie de rata possibility for an error to exist in the wording of the text of article 531, paragraph 1 of the new inflaiei (art. 531 alin. 2). Obligaia prinilor de a ntreine Civil Code. As a consequence, we believe that minorul nceteaz prin ajungerea acestuia la for the change of the support quantum it is majorat. nainte ca minorul s mplineasc enough to appear changes regarding one of the vrsta majoratului obligaia prinilor de a-l two elements depending on which the support is ntreine poate nceta prin cstoria acestuia la established. A new element brought by the new Civil mplinirea vrstei de 16 ani n condiiile art. 272 Code regarding the change of the support extent alin. 2-5 din noul Cod civil. Dup mplinirea vrstei de 18 ani de is that it is expressly stipulated that the
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

132

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

ctre copil prinii au obligaia de a-l ntreine numai dac acesta se afl n continuarea studiilor. Aceast obligaie a prinilor este expres reglementat de prevederile art. 499 alin. 3 din noul Cod civil i exist potrivit aceluiai text, pn cnd copilul termin studiile dar fr a depi vrsta de 26 de ani. Obligaia de ntreinere a minorului mai poate nceta i prin decesul printelui debitor al acestei obligaii ori al minorului (art. 514 alin. 2 din noul Cod civil). Ca noutate, n noul Cod civil se prevede c dac creditorul ntreinerii a decedat n perioada corespunztoare unei rate, ntreinerea este datorat n ntregime pentru acea perioad (art. 533 alin. 2). n cazul n care debitor al obligaiei de ntreinere este tatl ncetarea acesteia are loc i n cazul n care el tgduiete cu succes paternitatea copilului. Acesta va putea cere restituirea sumelor prestate anterior tgduirii paternitii cu titlu de pensie de ntreinere n temeiul art. 534 din noul Cod civil care reglementeaz restituirea ntreinerii nedatorate. Potrivit acestui articol cel care a executat obligaia poate s cear restituirea de la cel care a primit-o sau de la cel care avea, n realitate, obligaia s o presteze, n acest din urm caz, pe temeiul mbogirii fr just cauz, dac, din orice motiv, se dovedete c ntreinerea prestat, de bunvoie sau ca urmare a unei hotrri judectoreti, nu era datorat. Bibliografie V. Georgescu, Obligaia de ntreinere a prinilor fa de copiii lor minori n dreptul R.P.R., n Legalitatea Popular, nr. 6/1957; E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Ocrotirea printeasc.(Drepturile i ndatoririle prinilor fa de copiii minori), Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1960; Sc. erbnescu, Codul familiei comentat i adnotat, Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1963; T. R. Popescu, Dreptul familiei. Tratat, vol. II, Ediie revzut, Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1965;

supporting alimony established in a stable amount is indexed by the law, per trimester, depending on the inflation rate (art. 531, paragraph 2). The parents obligation to support the minor stops when he reaches the full age. Before the minor reaches the full age, the parents obligation to support him may stop if he gets married when reaching 16 in conditions of art. 272, paragraph 2-5 of the new Civil Code. After the child reaches 18, the parents have the obligation to support him only if he continues his studies. This obligation of the parents is expressly regulated by the stipulations of art. 499, paragraph 3 of the new Civil Code and it exists according to the same text until the child achieves his studies, but without crossing the age of 26. The obligation to support the minor may also stop because of the death of the parent who is debtor of this obligation or of the minor (art. 514, paragraph 2 of the new Civil Code). As a new element, the new Civil Code stipulates that, if the creditor of the support died during an instalment, the support is entirely owed for that time period (art. 533, paragraph 2). If the debtor of the supporting obligation is the father, its cessation occurs also if he successfully denies the childs paternity. He will be able to ask for the restitution of the amounts performed before the denial of the paternity as supporting alimony based on art. 534 of the new Civil Code that regulates the restitution of the non-owed support. According to this article, the one who executed the obligation may demand the restitution from the one who received it or from the one who actually had the obligation to perform it, in this last case, based on the enrichment with no fair cause, if, by any reason, it is proved that the support performed voluntarily or as a consequence of a judicial decision, was not owed. Bibliography: V. Georgescu, The Parents Obligation to Support their Minor Children in R.P.R. Law, in Peoples Legality, no. 6/1957;

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

133

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

I. Albu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1975; Al. Bacaci, Raporturile juridice patrimoniale n dreptul familiei, Editura Dacia, ClujNapoca, 1986; Al. Bacaci, Obligaia de ntreinere dintre prini i copii, n Revista Romn de Drept, nr. 10/1987; Legislaia familiei i practica judiciar n materie, Ministerul Justiiei, 1987, (Lucrare redactat de: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu); I. Mihu, Culegere de practic judiciar n materie civil pe anul 1990; Probleme de drept din deciziile Curii Supreme de Justiie, 1990-1992, Editura Orizonturi, Bucureti, 1993; D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Legislaia familiei, vol. I, Editura Moldova, Iai, 1997; Culegere de practic judiciar a Tribunalului Bucureti 1993-1997, Coordonator D. Lupacu, Editura all Beck, Bucureti, 1998; I. P. Filipescu, Tratat de dreptul familiei, Ediia a V-a, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2000; I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, ntreinerea n contextul drepturilor fundamentale, Editura Themis, Craiova, 2001; Buletinul jurisprudenei, 1990-2003, lucrare realizat de S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Lazr, I. Ionescu, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2003; P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005; D. Lupacu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Rosetti, Bucureti, 2005; F. Ciutacu, Dreptul familiei. Culegere de spee. Modele de aciuni, Editura Themis Cart, 2005; Al. Bacaci, Raporturile patrimoniale n dreptul familiei, Ediia 2, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007; E. Rou, Dreptul familiei. Practic judiciar. Hotrri C.E.D.O., Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007; T. Bodoac, Discuii referitoare la interpretarea art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, n Dreptul, nr. 10/2008;

E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Parental Protection. (Parents Rights and Duties regarding their Minor Children), Scientific Press, Bucharest, 1960 Sc. erbnescu, Commented and Annotated Family Code, Scientific Press, Bucharest, 1963 T. R. Popescu, Family Law. Treaty, vol. II, Reviewed Edition, Didactic and Pedagogical Press, Bucharest, 1965 I. Albu, Family Law, Didactic and Pedagogical Press, Bucharest, 1975 Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Juridical Reports in Family Law, Dacia Press, Cluj-Napoca, 1986 Al. Bacaci, The Supporting Obligation between Parents and Children, in Romanian Law Review, no. 10/1987 Family Legislation and Judicial Practice in Matter, Ministry of Justice, 1987, (Work edited by: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu) I. Mihu, Judicial Practice Book in Civil Matter for the year 1990 Law Problems in the Decisions of the Supreme Justice Court, 1990-1992, Orizonturi Press, Bucharest, 1993 D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Family Legislation, vol. I, Moldova Press, Iai, 1997 Judicial Practice Book of Bucharest Court 19931997, Coordinator D. Lupacu, all Beck Press, Bucharest, 1998 I. P. Filipescu, Family Law Treaty, the 5th Edition, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2000 I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, Support in the Context of the Basic Rights, Themis Press, Craiova, 2001 Jurisprudence Bulletin, 1990-2003, work accomplished by S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Lazr, I. Ionescu, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2003 P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005 D. Lupacu, Family Law, Rosetti Press, Bucharest, 2005 F. Ciutacu, Family Law. Causes Book. Models of Actions, Themis Cart Press, 2005 Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Reports in Family Law, 2nd Edition, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007 E. Rou, Family Law. Judicial Practice.

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

134

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discuii privind determinarea cuantumului ntreinerii pe care printele sau adoptatorul o datoreaz copilului, n Dreptul nr. 6/2009;

C.E.D.O. Decisions, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007 T. Bodoac, Discussions referring to the interpretation of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code, in Law, no. 10/2008 A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discussions regarding the Determination of the Quantum of the Support owed to the Child by the Parent or by the Adopter, in Law no. 6/2009

Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 351 din 21 februarie 1980, n Revista Romn de Drept, nr. 9/1980, p. 60. Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 993 din 13 decembrie 1954 n ,,Legalitatea Popular nr. 1/1955, p. 84. 3 E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Ocrotirea printeasc.(Drepturile i ndatoririle prinilor fa de copiii minori), Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1960, p. 176. 4 Al. Bacaci, Obligaia de ntreinere dintre prini i copii, n Revista Romn de Drept, nr. 10/1987, p. 30. n acelai sens a se vedea Trib. Suprem, Col. civ., dec. nr. 1621/1956, n Legalitatea Popular, nr. 9/1957, p.1137. n sensul c ceea ce se prezum este incapacitatea de munc n timpul minoritii, prezumie juris tantum care poate fi rsturnat prin proba contrar, iar nevoia n care minorul se afl trebuie dovedit a se vedea T. R. Popescu, Dreptul familiei. Tratat, vol. II, Ediie revzut, Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1965, p. 204; Sc. erbnescu, Codul familiei comentat i adnotat, Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1963, p. 246. 5 Trib. jud. Galai, dec. civ. nr. 384 din 12 mai 1972, n Legislaia familiei i practica judiciar n materie, Ministerul Justiiei, 1987, (Lucrare redactat de: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu) p. 460. 6 I. Albu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1975, p. 302; T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 203; I. P. Filipescu, Tratat de dreptul familiei, Ediia a V-a, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2000, p. 471. 7 Fostul Trib. al Capitalei, , col. II civ., dec. nr. 1860 din 04 august 1955, n Legalitatea Popular nr. 7/1955, p. 812. 8 Al. Bacaci, Raporturile patrimoniale n dreptul familiei, Ediia 2, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007, p. 225. 9 E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, op. cit., p. 108 i urm; V. Georgescu, Obligaia de ntreinere a prinilor fa de copiii lor minori n dreptul R.P.R., n Legalitatea Popular, nr. 6/1957; 10 T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 204. 11 Al. Bacaci, Raporturile juridice patrimoniale n dreptul familiei, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1986, p. 217-218. 12 Trib. Arge, dec. civ. nr. 185/1958 cu not de A. Hinsenrad, n Legalitatea Popular nr. 11/1959, p. 118; Trib. Capitalei, col. VI civil, dec. nr. 2033/1952 n Justiia Nou, nr. 3/1958, p. 330. 13 Trib. Jud. Iai, dec. civ. nr. 8091/1968, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 9/1969, p. 142. 14 Trib. Jud. Neam, dec. civ. nr. 295/1982, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 12/1982, p. 63. 15 nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Secia civil, dec. nr. 3393 din 6 mai 2004; dec. nr. 3582 din 14 mai 2004, n E. Rou, Dreptul familiei. Practic judiciar. Hotrri C.E.D.O., Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007, p. 111 i urm; Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 1006/1992, n Tribunalul Municipiului Bucureti, Culegere de practic judiciar civil pe anul 1992, p. 58-59. 16 Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a III-a civil, dec. nr. 46/1992, n Tribunalulop. cit., p. 58; nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Secia civil, dec. nr. 3795 din 20 mai 2004 n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 105-107; Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 973 din 15 mai 2006, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 119-121. 17 Citat de P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005, p. 481. 18 Trib. Suprem, sec. civ. dec. nr. 2188/1977, n CD 1977, p. 119. 19 Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 1812 din 3 septembrie 1991 n Buletinul jurisprudenei, 1990-2003, lucrare realizat de S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Lazr, I. Ionescu, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2003, p. 493-494; Trib. Suprem, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 2108 din 3 decembrie 1975, n Legislaia familiei i practica judiciar n materie, Ministerul Justiiei, 1987 (Lucrare redactat de: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu), p. 463-464. 20 Trib. Suprem, Sec. civ., dec nr. 524 din 11 martie 1980, n Legislaia familiei, op. cit., p. 464. 21 I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 478. 22 Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 641 din 11 aprilie 1990, n Buletinul jurisprudenei 1990-2003op. cit., p. 493. 23 Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 786 din 06 aprilie 1993, n Buletinul jurisprudenei 1990-2003op. cit., p. 494.
2

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

135

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

Trib. Suprem, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 864 din 12 aprilie 1972 n Legislaia familieiop. cit., p. 467. Trib. Jud. Timi, dec. civ. nr. 322 din 14 martie 1980, n Legislaia familieiop. cit., p. 467. 26 Trib. Suprem, Col. civ., dec. nr. 378/1955 n CD 1955, vol. I, p. 234-236; Trib. jud. Slaj, dec. civ. nr. 281/1980, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 3/1981, p. 58-59. 27 Trib. Suprem, sec. civ. dec. nr. 1556/1976 n CD 1976, p. 175; Trib. jud. Hunedoara, dec. civ. nr. 749/1974, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 1/1979, p. 54. 28 Al. Bacaci, Raporturileop. cit., 1986, p. 233. 29 Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 625 din 10 aprilie 1990 n Probleme de drept din deciziile Curii Supreme de Justiie, 1990-1992, Editura Orizonturi, Bucureti, 1993, p. 210. 30 I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, ntreinerea n contextul drepturilor fundamentale, Editura Themis, Craiova, 2001, p. 328; D. Lupacu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Rosetti, Bucureti, 2005, p. 280. 31 Trib Suprem, dec. de ndrumare nr. 12 din 30 septembrie 1967, n Legislaia familieiop. cit., p. 221-223. 32 Idem. 33 Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 961 din 27 august 1958, n CD, 1958, p. 232. 34 Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 1957 din 12 decembrie 1962, n Justiia Nou nr. 12/1963, p. 168. 35 Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 2047/1979 n CD, 1979, p. 164; nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 2773 din 7 aprilie 2004, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 117-118. 36 Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 1191/1972 n CD, 1972, p. 227; dec. civ. nr. 1507/1971, n CD, 1971, p. 150. n cazuri excepionale, cnd nevoile copiilor minori ndreptii la ntreinere sunt aproximativ aceleai, se poate determina i o sum global pentru toi minorii. n acest sens a se vedea Trib. Suprem, dec. de ndrumare, nr. 16/1965, n CD 1952-1965, p. 139. 37 Trib. Suprem, Sec civ., dec. nr. 2047 din 13 noiembrie 1979, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 3/1989, p. 66. 38 nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Secia civil i de proprietate intelectual, dec. nr. 3317 din 25 aprilie 2005, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 103-105. 39 Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Sec. a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 513/1992, n Tribunalul Municipiului Bucureti, Culegere de practic judiciar civil pe anul 1992, p. 57; Curtea de Apel Craiova Secia civil, dec. nr. 5146 din 5 noiembrie 1997, nepublicat, n F. Ciutacu, Dreptul familiei. Culegere de spee. Modele de aciuni, Editura Themis Cart, 2005, p. 76. 40 T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 219; I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 475; Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 2304 din 18 noiembrie 1955, n CD, 1955, vol. I, p. 238. 41 T. Bodoac, Discuii referitoare la interpretarea art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, n Dreptul, nr. 10/2008, p. 80-83. 42 Curtea Constituional, decizia nr. 327 din 14 septembrie 2004, definitiv, publicat n Monitorul oficial al Romniei, nr. 866 din 22 septembrie 2004; decizia nr. 168 din 28 februarie 2006, definitiv, publicat n Monitorul oficial al Romniei nr. 269 din 24 martie 2006. 43 Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 1590/1960, n C.D. 1960, p. 305. 44 Trib. Suprem., Sec. civ., dec. nr. 241 din 1 martie 1961 n D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Legislaia familiei, vol. I, Editura Moldova, Iai, 1997, p. 281. 45 Trib. Jud. Tulcea, dec. civ. nr. 204 din 20 mai 1976, n Legislaia familiei,...op. cit., p. 458. 46 Al. Bacaci, V.-Cl. Dumitrache, C. Hageanu, op. cit., p. 297-298. 47 nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 3802 din 20 mai 2004, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 109-111; Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 1526 din 200 august 1992, n Buletinul Jurisprudeneiop. cit., p. 494. 48 Trib. Suprem, dec. de ndrumare nr. 2 din 20 februarie 1971, n Legislaia familiei,op. cit., p. 230-233; n aceslai sens Trib. Suprem, Sec civ., dec. nr. 351 din 21 februarie 1980, n Legislaia familiei,op. cit., p. 473; nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 3799 din 20 mai 2004, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 107-109. 49 Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Sec. a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 1055 din 20 mai 1993, n Culegere de practic judiciar a Tribunalului Bucureti 1993-1997, Coordonator D. Lupacu, Editura all Beck, Bucureti, 1998, p. 202. 50 Trib. Jud. Bistria-Nsud, dec. civ. nr. 188/1971, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 11/1972, p. 159. 51 Trib. Suprem, dec. de ndrumare nr. 19/1964, n CD 1964, p. 39; Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a III-a civ., dec. nr. 287/1990, n I. Mihu, Culegere de practic judiciar n materie civil pe anul 1990, p. 41. 52 Trib. Suprem, col. civ., dec. nr. 1590/1960, n CD 1960, p. 305. 53 P. Anca, not aprobativ la dec. fostului Trib. Reg. Suceava, nr. 661/1965, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 5/1967, p. 133-136. 54 V. Ptulea, not critic la dec. fostului Trib. Reg Suceava, nr. 661/1965, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 5/1967, p. 132133. 55 Prevederile noului Cod Civil reglementeaz att nedemnitatea de drept (art. 958) ct i nedemnitatea judiciar (art. 959). 56 n acest sens a se vedea A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discuii privind determinarea cuantumului ntreinerii pe care printele sau adoptatorul o datoreaz copilului, n Dreptul nr. 6/2009, p. 133. 57 Supreme Court, civil decision no. 351 since February, 21st 1980, in Romanian Law Review, no. 9/1980, p. 60.
25

24

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

136

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

Supreme Court, civil decision no. 993 since December, 13th 1954 in ,Peoples Legality no. 1/1955, p. 84. E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Parental Protection. (Parents Rights and Duties regarding their Minor Children), op. cit., p. 176. 60 Al. Bacaci, The Supporting Obligation between Parents and Children, in Romanian Law Review, no. 10/1987, p. 30. In the same sense, see Supreme Court, Civil Col., decision no. 1621/1956, in Peoples Legality, no. 9/1957, p.1137. Namely, it is presumed the inability to work during minority, a juris tantum presumption that can be turned by the contrary evidence, and the minors need must be proved, see T. R. Popescu, Family Law. Treaty, vol. II, Reviewed Edition, Didactic and Pedagogical Press, Bucharest, 1965, p. 204; Sc. erbnescu, Commented and Annotated Family Code, Scientific Press, Bucharest, 1963, p. 246. 61 County Court. Galai, civil decision no. 384 since May, 12th 1972, in Family Legislation and Judicial Practice in Matter, Ministry of Justice, 1987, (Work edited by: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu) p. 460. 62 I. Albu, Family Law, Didactic and Pedagogical Press, Bucharest, 1975, p. 302; T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 203; I. P. Filipescu, Family Law Treaty, the 5th Edition, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2000, p. 471. 63 Ex Capital Court, civil col. II, decision no. 1860 since August, 4th 1955, in Peoples Legality no. 7/1955, p. 812. 64 Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Reports in Family Law, 2nd Edition, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007, p. 225. 65 E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, op. cit., p. 108 and the following ones; V. Georgescu, The Parents Obligation to Support their Minor Children in R.P.R. Law, in Peoples Legality, no. 6/1957; 66 T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 204. 67 Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Juridical Reports in Family Law, Dacia Press, Cluj-Napoca, 1986, p. 217-218. 68 Arge Court, civil decision no. 185/1958 with note by A. Hinsenrad, in Peoples Legality no. 11/1959, p. 118; Capital Court, civil col. VI, decision no. 2033/1952 in New Justice, no. 3/1958, p. 330. 69 Iai County Court, civil decision no. 8091/1968, in Romanian Law Review no. 9/1969, p. 142. 70 Neam County Court, civil decision no. 295/1982, in Romanian Law Review no. 12/1982, p. 63. 71 High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3393 since May, 6th 2004; decision no. 3582 since May, th 14 2004, in E. Rou, Family Law. Judicial Practice. C.E.D.O. Decisions, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007, p. 111 and the following ones; Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 1006/1992, in Bucharest Municipal Court, Civil Judicial Practice Book for the year 1992, p. 58-59. 72 Bucharest Municipal Court, the 3rd Civil Section, decision no. 46/1992, in Courtop. cit., p. 58; High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3795 since May, 20th 2004 in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 105-107; Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 973 since May, 15th 2006, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 119-121. 73 Quoted by P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005, p. 481. 74 Supreme Court, civil section, decision no. 2188/1977, in CD 1977, p. 119. 75 Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 1812 since September, 3rd 1991 in Jurisprudence Bulletin, 1990-2003, work accomplished by S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Lazr, I. Ionescu, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2003, p. 493-494; Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 2108 since December, 3rd 1975, in Family Legislation and Judicial Practice in Matter, Ministry of Justice, 1987 (a work edited by: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu), p. 463-464. 76 Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 524 since March, 11th 1980, in Family Legislation, op. cit., p. 464. 77 I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 478. 78 Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 641 since April, 11th 1990, in Jurisprudence Bulletin 1990-2003op. cit., p. 493. 79 Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 786 since April, 6th 1993, in Jurisprudence Bulletin 1990-2003op. cit., p. 494. 80 Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 864 since April, 12th 1972 in Family Legislationop. cit., p. 467. 81 Timi County Court, civil decision no. 322 since March, 14th 1980, in Family Legislationop. cit., p. 467. 82 Supreme Court, Civil Col., decision no. 378/1955 in CD 1955, vol. I, p. 234-236; Slaj County Court, civil decision no. 281/1980, in Romanian Law Review no. 3/1981, p. 58-59. 83 Supreme Court, civil section, no. 1556/1976 in CD 1976, p. 175; Hunedoara County Court, civil decision no. 749/1974, in Romanian Law Review no. 1/1979, p. 54. 84 Al. Bacaci, Reportsop. cit., 1986, p. 233. 85 Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 625 since April, 10th 1990 in Law Problems in the Decisions of the Supreme Justice Court, 1990-1992, Orizonturi Press, Bucharest, 1993, p. 210. 86 I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, Support in the Context of the Basic Rights, Themis Press, Craiova, 2001, p. 328; D. Lupacu, Family Law, Rosetti Press, Bucharest, 2005, p. 280. 87 Supreme Court, guiding decision no. 12 since September, 30th 1967, in Family Legislationop. cit., p. 221-223. 88 Idem.
59

58

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

137

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010

Supreme Court, civil decision no. 961 since August, 27th 1958, in CD, 1958, p. 232. Supreme Court, civil decision no. 1957 since December, 12th 1962, in New Justice no. 12/1963, p. 168. 91 Supreme Court, civil decision no. 2047/1979 in CD, 1979, p. 164; High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 2773 since April, 7th 2004, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 117-118. 92 Supreme Court, civil decision no. 1191/1972 in CD, 1972, p. 227; civil decision no. 1507/1971, in CD, 1971, p. 150. In exceptional cases, when the needs of the minor children having the right to be supported are approximately the same, we may also determine a global amount for all the minors. In this sense, see Supreme Court, guiding decision, no. 16/1965, in CD 1952-1965, p. 139. 93 Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 2047 since November, 13th 1979, in Romanian Law Review no. 3/1989, p. 66. 94 High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil and Intellectual Property Section, decision no. 3317 since April, 25th 2005, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 103-105. 95 Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 513/1992, in Bucharest Municipal Court, Civil Judicial Practice Book for the year 1992, p. 57; Craiova Appeal Court Civil Section, Decision no. 5146 since November, 5th 1997, unpublished, in F. Ciutacu, Family Law. Causes Book. Models of Actions, Themis Cart Press, 2005, p. 76. 96 T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 219; I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 475; Supreme Court, civil decision no. 2304 since November, 18th 1955, in CD, 1955, vol. I, p. 238. 97 T. Bodoac, Discussions referring to the interpretation of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code, in Law, no. 10/2008, p. 80-83. 98 Constitutional Court, decision no. 327 since September, 14th 2004, being definitive, published in Romanias Official Gazette, no. 866 since September, 22nd 2004; decision no. 168 since February, 28th 2006, being definitive, published in Romanias Official Gazette no. 269 since March, 24th 2006. 99 Supreme Court, civil decision no. 1590/1960, in C.D. 1960, p. 305. 100 Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 241 since March, 1st 1961 in D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Family Legislation, vol. I, Moldova Press, Iai, 1997, p. 281. 101 Tulcea County Court, civil decision no. 204 since May, 20th 1976, in Family Legislation,...op. cit., p. 458. 102 Al. Bacaci, V.-Cl. Dumitrache, C. Hageanu, op. cit., p. 297-298. 103 High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3802 since May, 20th 2004, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 109-111; Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 1526 since August, 20th 1992, in Jurisprudence Bulletinop. cit., p. 494. 104 Supreme Court, guiding decision no. 2 since February, 20th 1971, in Family Legislation,op. cit., p. 230-233; In the same sense, Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 351 since February, 21st 1980, in Family Legislation,op. cit., p. 473; High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3799 since May, 20th 2004, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 107-109. 105 Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 1055 since May, 20th 1993, in Judicial Practice Book of Bucharest Court 1993-1997, Coordinator D. Lupacu, all Beck Press, Bucharest, 1998, p. 202. 106 Bistria-Nsud County Court, civil decision no. 188/1971, in Romanian Law Review no. 11/1972, p. 159. 107 Supreme Court, guiding decision no. 19/1964, in CD 1964, p. 39; Bucharest Municipal Court, the 3rd Civil Section, decision no. 287/1990, in I. Mihu, Judicial Practice Book in Civil Matter for the year 1990, p. 41. 108 Supreme Court, civil col., decision no. 1590/1960, in CD 1960, p. 305. 109 P. Anca, approving note to the decision of Suceava Ex-Regional Court, no. 661/1965, in Romanian Law Review no. 5/1967, p. 133-136. 110 V. Ptulea, critical note for the decision of Suceava ex-County Court, no. 661/1965, in Romanian Law Review no. 5/1967, p. 132-133. 111 The stipulations of the new Civil Code regulate both the law indignity (art. 958) and the judicial indignity (art. 959). 112 In this sense, see A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discussions regarding the Determination of the Quantum of the Support owed to the Child by the Parent or by the Adopter, in Law no. 6/2009, p. 133.
90

89

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010

138