Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr.

1/2011

VIOLENA N DREPTUL CIVIL Prof. univ. dr. Moise BOJINC Facultatea de tiine Juridice i Litere, Universitatea Constantin Brncui din Tg-Jiu
Abstract: Violena ca instituie juridic este cunoscut nc din dreptul roman, cristalizndu-se ca viciu de consimmnt n epoca lui Justinian. Ea este cunoscut i de vechiul drept romnesc i se gsete reglementat att n Codul civil actual ct i n Codul civil asumat i este definit ca fiind acel viciu de consimmnt ce const n ameninarea unei persoane cu un ru ori un pericol de natur s-i produc o temere ce o determin s ncheie un act juridic pe care, altfel, nu l-ar fi ncheiat. Cuvinte cheie: violena, dreptul civil, viciu de consimmnt, persoana, victima violenei

VIOLENCE IN CIVIL LAW Professor Ph.D. Moise BOJINC Faculty of Juridical Sciences and Letters Constantin Brncui University of Tg-Jiu
Abstract: Violence as a juridical institution has been known ever since the Roman Law, being crystallized as a vice in Justinians age. It is also known in the old Romanian law and is regulated both in the current civil Code and in the assumed Civil Code and is defined as being that consent vice which consists in threatening a person with an evil or a danger meant to cause a fear that determines it to conclude a juridical deed that it would not have concluded otherwise. Key-words:violence, civil law, consent vice, person, victim of violence

1. Istoricul noiunii de violen n drept 1. 1. Violena n dreptul roman Vechiul drept roman a cunoscut att violena fizic ct i pe cea psihic1, dar nu ca viciu de consimmnt, ci ca fapt delictual2 fcnd parte din rndul delictelor private noi3. La origini violena fizic (vis) era o cauz de inexisten a consimmntului i, pe cale de consecin, i a actului astfel ncheiat, pe cnd violena psihic constnd n ameninarea unei persoane cu un ru pentru a o determina s ncheie un contract era cea care afecta consimmntul, potrivit principiului: etiamsi coactus, tamen volui4 . Exercitarea violenei fizice era sancionat dar nu n legtur cu ncheierea actului juridic, ci ca fapt ce aducea atingere n sens material unei persoane fizice. Asemenea fapte constituiau obiectul delictului de injuria. Neluarea n seam a violenei ca viciu de consimmnt este explicabil pentru epoca veche, n primul rnd, ca urmare a

1. History of the notion of violence in law 1.1. Violence in Roman law The old Roman law knew both physical and psychic violence23, but not as a consent vice, but rather as a criminal action24 being a part of the new private crimes25. At origins, physical violence (vis) was a cause of consent inexistence and consequently of the concluded act, while psychic violence consisting in the threat of a person with a harm in order to determine it to conclude a contract was the one that affected the consent, according to the principle: etiamsi coactus, tamen volui26 . The exercise of physical violence was punished but not in relation to the conclusion of the juridical act, but rather as a fact that was materially detrimental to the natural person. Such facts were the subject of the de injuria crime. The failure to consider violence as a consent vice can be explained for the old

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

formalismului ce caracteriza regimul actelor juridice. n plus, caracterul public, prin prezena martorilor la ncheierea actelor, gesturile care trebuiau fcute i cuvintele rituale ce trebuiau rostite fceau practic imposibil exercitarea violenei asupra vreuneia din pri sub o form sau alta. Spre sfritul republicii ns, n condiiile dezvoltrii impetuoase a schimbului de mrfuri i a multiplicrii contractelor cu persoane de pe ntreg cuprinsul imperiului, formalismul juridic decade, i dreptul urmare, actele se ncheie prin simplul acord volitiv. Astfel, s-a creat posibilitatea exercitrii violenei i, ca atare, s-a resimit i nevoia sancionrii violenei psihice n actele juridice n vederea protejrii cocontractanilor. n aceste mprejurri exercitarea violenei morale a fost sancionat ca fapt delictual. Msura a fost luat n anul 74 .H. de ctre pretorul Octavius5 a pus la dispoziia victimei violenei o aciune denumit actio metus6. Aciunea era arbitrar. Astfel, reclamantul (delicventul) n caz de condamnare era invitat s restituie ceea ce a obinut prin violen. Dac nu se supunea ordinului de a satisface preteniile victimei era condamnat la plata unei sume de bani de patru ori valoarea pagubei cauzate7. Dup un an, suma se reducea la valoarea pagubei8. n msura mbogirii, aciunea se ndrepta i mpotriva motenitorilor. Cu aceeai modificare (a reducerii sumei la nivelul valorii pagubei), aciunea se putea intenta i mpotriva oricrui ter care ar fi profitat de pe urma actului de violen. De aceea, aceast aciune a fost considerat ca fiind o actio in rem scripta9. Prin aceast aciune se cerea desfiinarea actului juridic ncheiat. n afar de actio quod metus causa cu efectul artat se mai acorda, dup mprejurri exceptio metus ca mijloc de aprare mpotriva aciunii intentat de ctre delicvent n ipoteza n care acesta din urm inteniona si valorifice creana dobndit prin ameninri. Totodat, se mai acorda i restitutio in integrum propter metum prin care pretorul

ages, first of all as a result of the formalism that characterized the regime of juridical acts. Moreover, the public character, at least through the presence of witnesses at acts conclusion, the gestures that had to be made as well as ritual words that had to be said made it impossible for violence to be exercised on any of the parties under a form or another. Bt, towards the end of the republic, under the conditions of the necessary development of commodities exchange and multiplication of contracts with persons from all the empire, the juridical formalism decayed and therefore, acts were concluded with a mere willing agreement. Therefore, the possibility was created to exercise violence and therefore the need to punish psychic violence in juridical acts was felt in order to protect co-contracting parties. In these circumstances, moral violence was punished as a criminal action. The measure was taken in 74 BC by the praetor Octavius27 who provided the violence victim with an action called actio metus28. The action was arbitrary. Therefore, the complainant (the delinquent) in case of conviction was invited to return what he got through violence. In case of failure to obey the order of satisfying the claims of the victim, he was sentenced to pay an amount of money four times higher than the value of the damage29. After a year, the amount of money was reduced to the value of the damage30. In the enriching measure, the action was against the heirs. With the same amendment (of reducing the sum to the level of the damage), the action could be filed against any third party that would have taken advantage from the act of violence. This is why this action was considered an actio in rem scripta31. This action required the cancellation of the completed juridical act. Besides actio quod metus causa with the effect shown above, depending on circumstances exceptio metus was granted as a means of defence against the action filed by the delinquent if the latter intended to

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

desfiinnd actul ncheiat, repunea victima n valorise his debt acquired through threats. situaia juridic anterioar, putnd astfel s Restitutio in integrum propter intenteze toate aciunile pe care le avusese metum was also granted through which the contra adversarului10. praetor, by cancelling the completed act, restated the victim in the previous juridical 1.2. Violena n vechile legiuiri circumstance, being therefore able to file or the actions he had had against his opponent32. romneti n vechile legiuiri romneti violena a fost alturat dolului11. Acest lucru n-a condus la realizarea unor confuzii ntre cele dou, ci fiecare din ele i-au pstrat propria configuraie similar cu cea regsit astzi n legislaia civil actual. Astfel, Codul lui Andronache Donici, cap. 10 paragraful 4 arat Tocmelele fcnduse prin sil i fric, n-are trie, cci nimic nu este mai mult mpotriva firetii drepti i bunei credine dect frica i sla. Frica va s zic pornirea asupritoare care nspimnteaz pe om.12 La rndul su, Codul Caragea, precizeaz n Partea a III a, Capitolul I, art. 12 c: Tocmele se strc cnd de sl se vor tocmi. n fine, Codul Calimach, dup ce prevede n art. 1160 c orice tocmeal cere neaprat nvoirea de bun voie, slobod de fric i sl arat n art. 1162 i 1167 c n cazul acestui viciu de consimmnt, frica trebuie s fie de bun cuviin i temeinic. Codul Calimah, reglementeaz i violena provenit din partea unui ter. 1.2. Violence in the old Romanian laws

In the old Romanian laws, violence was placed near deceit33. This did not result into confusions between the two of them, each of them preserved its own configuration similar to the one found today in the current civil legislation. Therefore the Code of Andronache Donici, chapter 10 paragraph 4 says Agreements, made through coercion and fear, does not have any strength, because nothing is more against the natural justice and good faith than fear and coercion. The fear means the oppressive impulse that frightens man.34 In its turn, the Caragea Code stipulates in Part III, Chapter I, art. 12 that: Agreements are broken when are made through coercion. Finally, the Calimach Code, after it provides in art. 1160 that any agreement necessarily requires the willing consent, without any fear and coercion in art. 1162 and 1167 it shows that in the case of this 2. Noiunea de violen n dreptul consent vice, fear has to be of good will and solid. The Calimah Code regulates also civil i sediul su legal violence coming from a third party. Violena n dreptul civil poate fi definit ca fiind acel viciu de consimmnt ce 2. The notion of violence in civil law const n ameninarea unei persoane cu un ru and its legal headquarters de natur s-i produc o temere ce o determin s ncheie un act juridic, pe care, altfel, nu l-ar Violence in civil law can be defined fi ncheiat13. as that consent vice consisting of threatening Potrivit art. 956 C. civ. actual Este a person with a harm meant to cause a fear violen totdeauna cnd, spre a face pe o that determines it to conclude a juridical act, persoan a contracta i s-a insuflat temerea , that it would not have concluded otherwise35. raionabil dup dnsa, c va fi expus According to art. 956 current Civil persoana sau averea sa unui ru considerabil i Code There is always violence when in

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

prezent, iar potrivit art. 1216 alin. 2 C. civ. asumat: Exist violen cnd temerea insuflat este de aa natur nct partea ameninat putea s cread, dup mprejurri, c, n lipsa consimmntului su, viaa, persoana, onoarea sau bunurile sale ar fi expuse unui pericol grav i iminent . Codul civil actualmente n vigoare reglementeaz violena n art. 953, 955-959 i 961 iar, Codul civil asumat14, reglementeaz violena n art. 1206, 1216, 1217, 1219 i 1220. 3. Clasificarea violenei 3. 1. Criterii subdiviziunile violenei de clasificare

order to determine a person to conclude a contract, fear is induced that the person or its fortune may experience a considerable present harm, and according to art. 1216 par. 2 assumed Civil Code: There is violence when induced fear determines the threatened party to believe, depending on the circumstances that, in the absence of its consent, its life, person, honour or goods could be exposed to a serious imminent danger. The current relevant civil code regulates violence in art. 953, 955-959 and 961 and the assumed Civil Code36, regulates i violence in art. 1206, 1216, 1217, 1219 and 1220.

Literatura de specialitate15 clasific 3. Classification of violence violena viciu de consimmnt dup dou criterii i anume: dup natura rului cu care se 3. 1. Classification criteria and amenin i dup caracterul ameninrii. violence subdivisions Dup natura rului cu care se amenin se distinge ntre violena fizic i cea moral, Specialized literature37 classifies iar dup caracterul ameninrii violena poate fi violence as a consent vice according to two injust sau nelegitim i just sau legitim. criteria, namely: depending on the nature of harm used for threatening and depending on 3.2. Violena sau constrngerea fizic the threat character. Depending to the nature of harm used vis for threatening we distinguish between Violena sau constrngerea fizic vis physical and moral violence, and depending se manifest n situaia n care ameninarea cu on the threat character violence can be unjust rul privete integritatea fizic a persoanei i or illegitimate and just or legitimate. const n faptul reducerii victimei la un rol de simplu instrument n ncheierea actului juridic. 3.2. Violence or physical constraint O asemenea violen nu este socotit viciu de vis consimmnt ntruct n acest caz persoana nu-i manifest voina la ncheierea actului Violence or physical constraint vis juridic. Sanciunea ce intervine n acest caz is expressed in the case in which the threat refers to the physical integrity of the person este anulabilitatea actului juridic. and consists in reducing the victim to the role 3.3. Violena sau constrngerea of mere instrument in concluding the juridical act. Such violence is not considered a consent psihic sau moral metus vice because in this case the person does not Violena sau constrngerea psihic sau express its will at the conclusion of the moral metus este violena propriu-zis i juridical act. The penalty that occurs in this const n ameninarea unei persoane cu un ru case is dissolution of the juridical act. de natur s-i provoace o temere care o determin la ncheierea unui act juridic care 3.3. Mental or moral violence or
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

10

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

altfel nu l-ar fi ncheiat. 3.4. Violena injust sau nelegitim

constraint metus

Mental or moral violence or constraint metus is the actual violence and Violena este injust sau nelegitim consists in threatening a person with a harm cnd este exercitat fr drept. Aceasta este un meant to cause a fear that determines the viciu de consimmnt i conduce la conclusion of a juridical act that it would not have concluded otherwise. anulabilitatea actului astfel ncheiat. 3.5. Violena just sau legitim 3.4. Unjust or illegitimate violence

Violence is unjust or illegitimate Este just sau legitim violena care se realizeaz n exercitarea unui drept i care nu when it is exercised without any right. This is conduce la anulabilitatea actului juridic astfel a consent vice and results in the dissolution of the concluded juridical act. ncheiat. 4. Structura violenei viciu de consimmnt 3.5. Just or legitimate violence

We consider just or legitimate the Violena viciu de consimmnt violence occurring in the exercise of a right presupune ntrunirea a dou elemente that does not result in the dissolution of the constitutive i anume: concluded juridical act. a) un element obiectiv i exterior, care const n ameninarea cu un ru considerabil i 4. Structure of violence consent prezent potrivit art. 956 alin. (1) C. civ. actual vice i respectiv cu un pericol grav i iminent, conform art. 1216 alin. 2 C. civ. asumat; Violence consent vice supposes b) un element subiectiv, de natur the compliance with two constitutive psihologic, ce const n insuflarea unei temeri elements, namely: care determin victima violenei s ncheie un a) an objective exterior element which act juridic pe care n lipsa temerii nu l-ar fi consists in threatening with a considerable ncheiat. and present harm according to art. 956 par. Subliniem c ceea ce viciaz (1) current Civil code and respectively with a consimmntul este temerea provocat de serious and imminent harm, according to art. ameninarea i nu ameninarea, ca atare 1216 par. 2 assumed civil code; b) a subjective psychological element consisting in inducing a fear that causes the 5. Condiii victim of violence to conclude a juridical act Pentru a fi un viciu de consimmnt, that it would have not concluded in the violena trebuie s ntruneasc n mod absence of fear. cumulativ dou condiii i anume: We underline that what vices the - s fie determinant pentru ncheierea consent is the fear caused by the threat and actului juridic i; not the treat in itself - s fie injust, nelegitim, ilicit. a) Caracterul determinant al violenei 5. Conditions este dat de teama pe care o insufl victimei violenei. Aceast temere trebuie s fie, potrivit In order to get a consent vice, legii raionabil dup dnsa, adic dup violence should jointly meet two conditions,
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

11

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

victima violenei. Cu alte cuvinte trebuie s fie hotrtoare, astfel nct, n lipsa ei actul juridic nu s-ar fi ncheiat. Potrivit art. 956 alin. 2 C. civ, n aprecierea caracterului determinat al temerii se ia n considerare persoana respectiv, victim a violenei, sub aspectul vrstei, sntii, gradului de cultur, al firii, al forei, iar potrivit art. 1216 alin. 4 C. civ. asumat se are n vedere vrsta, sntatea, caracterul celui asupra cruia s-a exercitat violena, precum i de orice alt mprejurare ce a putut influena starea acestuia la momentul ncheierii contractului. Cu alte cuvinte, criteriul de apreciere a caracterului hotrtor al temerii este unul subiectiv i nu unul obiectiv. Cu privire la rul cu care este ameninat persoana, Codul civil actual arat c acesta trebuie s fie considerabil i prezent, iar Codul civil asumat arat c temerea insuflat trebuie s fie de aa natur nct partea ameninat s cread, dup mprejurri, c n lipsa consimmntului su, viaa, onoarea i bunurile sale ar fi expuse unui pericol grav i iminent. Literatura de specialitate16 a subliniat c rul, respectiv pericolul nu trebuie s fie prezent la ncheierea actului, ci temerea ce inspir aceast ameninare trebuie s fie prezent i actual, respectiv grav i iminent. Rul, respectiv pericolul poare fi i viitor. Cu alte cuvinte, ameninarea cu un ru sau cu un pericol grav poate constitui violen dac este de natur s nasc n sufletul prii o temere actual. Privitor la natura rului s-a artat c acesta poate fi patrimonial (avere, valori materiale, bunuri etc.) sau psihic (libertatea, onoarea, prestigiul etc.), iar n ceea ce-l privete pe cel care va suporta rul efectiv s-a stabilit c poate fi pe lng persoana ameninat, orice alt individ uman fa de care aceasta are sau se presupune c nutrete ori cultiv anumite sentimente sau interese (rude, afini, prieteni etc.) sens care este transpus n C. civ. asumat n art. 1216 alin. 3 care vorbete de persoane apropiate precum soul, soia, ascendenii i descendenii prii al crei

namely: - to be determining for the conclusion of the juridical act and; - to be unjust, illegitimate, illicit. a) The determining character of violence is given by that fear it induces to the victim of violence. This fear has to be, according to the law, reasonable according to it, that is according to the victim of violence. In other words, they have to be decisive, so that, in its absence, it would not have been concluded. According to art. 956 par. 2 Civil code, the person, victim of violence is considered in appreciating the determined character of the fear is considered, under the aspect of age, health, level of culture, character, force and art. 1216 par. 4 assumed Civil code considers the age, health, the character of the one on which violence was exercised, as well as any other circumstance that might have influenced its state at the moment the contract is concluded. In other words, the appreciation criterion of the fear decisiveness is subjective and not objective. Regarding the harm that threatens the person, the current Civil code shows that it has to be considerable and present and the assumed Civil Code shows that the induced fear has to be in such a way that the threatened party to believe, that in the absence of its consent, its life, honour and goods would be exposed to a serious and imminent danger. has The specialized literature38 revealed that harm, danger respectively does not have to be present after the act is concluded, but rather the fear that inspires this threat has to be present and current, respectively serious and imminent. The harm, the danger respectively cannot happen in the future. In other words, threatening with a harm or a serious danger can be considered violence if it produces a current fear in the partys soul. In relation to the nature of the evil, it has been demonstrated that it can be

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

12

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

consimmnt a fost viciat. b) A doua condiie aceea ca violena s fie injust, nelegitim, ilicit, este ndeplinit ori de cte ori aceasta nu este fcut n exercitarea unui drept, n limitele legii. De aici ne putem da seama c nu orice ameninare cu un ru constituie violen viciu de consimmnt. Practica judectoreasc a statuat c nu atrage anulabilitatea actului, violena care ar consta n: - ameninarea cu folosirea unei ci legale spre exemplu, fapta creditorului de a amenina c va reclama repararea prejudiciului suferit; - temerea de consecine legale i fireti ale exercitrii unui drept de ctre persoana vtmat printr-o infraciune sau de alt persoan interesat. Se cuvine a mai meniona c simpla temere nu poate fi asimilat violenei viciu de consimmnt. Temerea reverenioas este mai mult respect dect temere pe care unele persoane sunt datoare s-l dea altora, spre exemplu, copiii-prinilor. Temerea generat de un asemenea respect nu apare ca nelegitim. n acest sens, art. 1219 C. civ. asumat precizeaz c simpla temere izvort din respect, fr s fie violen, nu atrage nulitatea contractului. Evident, n situaia n care temerea reverenioas ar fi dublat de o violen propriu-zis actul va fi anulabil, ns nu pentru temerea reverenioas, ci pentru violen. Literatura17 i practica de specialitate18 socotesc c art. 958 C. civ. care se refer la temerea reverenioas, reprezint tocmai o aplicaie a principiului c violena este viciu de consimmnt numai dac ameninarea este nelegitim. Aceleai argumente pot constitui temei i pentru art. 1219 C. civ. asumat. Pentru evitarea unor confuzii sau erori se mai impun unele precizri: - exist violen viciu de consimmnt atunci cnd dei se tinde la realizarea unui drept, se folosesc mijloace ilicite. De pild, pentru a obine recunoaterea datoriei de ctre debitor, creditorul l amenin cu vtmarea integritii corporale;

patrimonial (fortune, material values, goods, etc.) or psychic (freedom, honour, prestige etc.), and the person bearing that harm can be besides the threatened person, any other human individual towards whom it has or it is suppose to have certain feelings or interests (relatives, friends etc.) which is transposed in the assumed Civil Code in art. 1216 par. 3 which speaks of close persons like the husband, the wife, ascendants and descendants of the party whose consent has be harmed. b) The second condition is that violence be unjust, illegitimate, illicit, to be fulfilled anytime it is not made in the exercise of a right, within the limits of the law. This is how we realize that not any threat with a harm is violence consent vice. Judicial practice has shown that the following types of violence do not draw the cancellation of the act: - the threat to use a legal means, for instance the creditors action to threaten to make a complaints for repairing the prejudice; - fear of legal and natural consequences of exercising a right by the injured party due to a crime or by another interested person. We should mention that the mere fear cannot be assimilated to violence as a consent vice. The ceremonious fear is more respect that fear that some persons have to give to the others, for instance, children to their parents. The fear generated by such a respect does not appear as illegitimate. In this sense, art. 1219 assumed Civil Code stipulates that the mere fear resulting from respect without any violence does not draw the contract nullity. Obviously, if the ceremonious fear is doubled by actual violence, the act will be cancellable, but not for the ceremonious fear, but rather for violence. The specialized literature39 and practice40 think that art. 958 Civil code that refers to ceremonial fear is an application of the principle that violence is a consent vice only if the threat is illegitimate. The same arguments are the basis for art. 1219 assumed civil code.

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

13

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

- folosirea unui mijloc legal, ntr-un scop ilicit, va constitui violen numai n mod excepional dac in concreto, s-ar aprecia c sunt ndeplinite condiiile violenei, dar va constitui, n orice caz, un abuz de drept, sancionat corespunztor. Spre exemplu, victima unei infraciuni, care nu a suferit nici un prejudiciu patrimonial, obine de la infractor renunarea la un bun19. - spre deosebire de dol n actele bilaterale, cu titlu oneros, n cazul violenei nu se cere condiia de a proveni de la cocontractant. Art. 955 C. civ. actual i 1220 C. civ. asumat prevd c violena atrage anularea contractului i atunci cnd este exercitat de un ter, ns numai dac partea al crei consimmnt nu a fost viciat cunotea, sau, dup caz, ar fi trebuit s cunoasc violena svrit de ctre ter. Independent de anularea contractului, autorul violenei rspunde de prejudiciile ce se cauzeaz, cnd violena este exercitat de alt persoan dect aceea n folosul creia s-a fcut convenia. Aceast soluie este singura raional i n deplin concordan cu fundamentul psihologic al viciilor de consimmnt. De vreme ce constrngerea altereaz actul voliional, este indiferent dac ea eman de la cocontractant sau de la un ter20. Mai mult literatura juridic de specialitate21 socotete c violena trebuie admis ca viciu de consimmnt nu numai cnd este exercitat de o persoan ci i atunci cnd este exercitat de un fapt exterior, adic de o stare de necesitate22.

In order to avoid confusions or errors, several mentions are required: - there is violence consent vice when although the tendency is to achieve a right, illicit means are used. For instance, in order to get the recognition of the debt by the debtor, the creditor threatens to harm its body integrity; - the use of a legal means, for illicit purposes will be violence only exceptionally if in concreto, the conditions of violence are met, but will anyway be an abuse of rights, sanctioned accordingly. For instance, the victim of an offence, that has not suffered a patrimonial prejudice, achieves waiver from a good from the offender41. - unlike deceit in bilateral onerous acts, violence does not require the condition of coming from the co-contractor. Art. 955 current Civil code and 1220 assumed Civil code provide that violence draws the annulment of the contract when it is exercised by third party, only if the party whose consent had not been harmed, knew or should have known violence committed by third parties. Independently from the annulment of the contract, the author of the violence is liable for the prejudices caused when violence is exercised by a different person than the one for whom the convention was made. This solution is the only one reasonable and in full agreement with the psychological basis of consent vices. Since constraint alters the willing act, it does not matter whether it results from the co-contractor or from a third party42. Moreover, the specialized juridical Bibliografie literature43 feels that violence should be Legea nr. 287/2009 privind Codul civil admitted as a consent vice not only when it is a fost publicat n Monitorul Oficial al exercised by a person but also when it is Romniei, Partea I, nr. 511 din 24 iulie 2009. exercised by an exterior fact, that is by a state Beleiu Gheorghe, Drept civil romn. of necessity44. Introducere n dreptul civil. Subiectele dreptului civil, Ediia a VII a revzut i Bibliography adugit de Marian Nicolae i Petric Truc, Editura Universul Juridic, Bucureti, 2001 Law no. 287/2009 regarding the Civil Bojinc Moise, Drept civil roman. Code was published in the Official Gazette of Teoria general, Ediia a V a actualizat i Romania, Part I, nr. 511 from 24th of July

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

14

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

mbuntit, Editura Academica Brncui, Tg Jiu, 2007 Boroi Gabriel, Drept civil. Partea general. Persoanele, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2002 Ctuneanu, I. C., Curs elementar de drept drept roman, Ediia a II a, Editura Cartea Romneasc S. A., Bucureti, 1924 Cosma D., Teoria general a actului juridic civil, Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1969 Dogaru Ion, Popa Nicolae, Dnior Dan Claudiu, Cercel Sevastian, Bazele dreptului civil, Volumul I. Teoria general. Editura C. H. BECK, Bucureti, 2008 Hurbean Ada, Viciile de consimmnt, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2010 Molcu Emil, Oancea Dan, Drept roman, Casa de editur i pres ansa S.R.L., Bucureti, 1995 Pop Aurel, Beleiu Gheorghe, Curs de drept civil. Partea general., Bucureti, 1975 Stoicescu C., Curs elementar de drept roman, Ediiunea a II a, Tipografia Naional Jean Ionescu, et comp., Bucureti, 1927

2009. Beleiu Gheorghe, Romanian Civil Law. Introduction in civil law. Subjects of civil law, 7th edition, revised and completed by Marian Nicolae and Petric Truc, Juridical Universe Press, Bucharest, 2001 Bojinc Moise, Roman Civil Law. General theory, 5th edition updated and improved, Academica Brncui Press, Tg Jiu, 2007 Boroi Gabriel, Civil Law. General Part. Persons, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2002 Ctuneanu, I. C., Elementary course of Roman Law, 2nd edition, Cartea Romneasc S. A. Press, Bucharest, 1924 Cosma D., General theory of civil juridical act, Scientific Press, Bucharest, 1969 Dogaru Ion, Popa Nicolae, Dnior Dan Claudiu, Cercel Sevastian, Civil Law Basics, Volume I. General Theory. C. H. BECK Press, Bucharest, 2008 Hurbean Ada, Consent vices, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2010 Molcu Emil, Oancea Dan, Roman Law, ansa S.R.L. Publishing House, Bucharest, 1995 Pop Aurel, Beleiu Gheorghe, Civil Law Course. General Part., Bucharest, 1975 Stoicescu C., Elementary course of Roman Law, 2nd edition, National Tipography Jean Ionescu, et comp., Bucharest, 1927

A se vedea, Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, Drept roman, Casa de editur i pres ansa S.R.L., Bucureti, 1995, p. 168. 2 Dup unii autori, violena psihic se configureaz ca viciu de consimmnt n epoca lui Justinian. A se vedea, Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, op. cit., p. 328. 3 Delictele private noi sunt n numr de patru i anume: metus, dolus, rapina i fraus creditorum, iar delictele vechi sunt: furtul, in iuria i damnum in iuria datum. 4 O voin constrns este totui voin. A se vedea Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, op. cit., p. 328, I. C. Ctuneanu, Curs elementar de drept drept roman, Ediia a II a, Editura Cartea Romneasc S. A., Bucureti, 1924, p. 390. 5 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390. 6 Denumirea complet a lui actio erade actio quod metus causa. A se vedea I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390. 7 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390, Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, op. cit., p. 328, C. Stoicescu, Curs elementar de drept roman, Ediiunea a II a, Tipografia Naional Jean Ionescu, et comp., Bucureti, 1927, p. 235. 8 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390. 9 I. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 391. 10 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 391. 11 A se vedea, Ada Hurbean, Viciile de consimmnt, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2010, p. 180 181. Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

15

Analele Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiin e Juridice, Nr. 1/2011

Ada Hurbean, op. cit., p. 181. Gheorghe Beleiu, Drept civil romn. Introducere n dreptul civil. Subiectele dreptului civil, Ediia a VII a revzut i adugit de Marian Nicolae i Petric Truc, Editura Universul Juridic, Bucureti, 2001, p. 154. Moise Bojinc, Drept civil roman. Teoria general, Ediia a V a actualizat i mbuntit, Editura Academica Brncui, Tg Jiu, 2007, Gabriel Boroi, Drept civil. Partea general. Persoanele, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2002, p. 16. 14 Legea nr. 287/2009 privind Codul civil a fost publicat n Monitorul Oficial al Romniei, Partea I, nr. 511 din 24 iulie 2009. 15 Gabriel Boroi, op. cit., p. 169, Ion Dogaru, Nicolae Popa, Dan Claudiu Dnior, Sevastian Cercel, Bazele dreptului civil, Volumul I. Teoria general. Editura C. H. BECK, Bucureti, 2008, p. 454. 16 Gheorghe Beleiu, op. cit., p. 156. 17 Ion Dogaru, Nicolae Popa, Dan Claudiu Dnior, Sevastian Cercel, op. cit., p. 455. 18 Trib. Suprem, decizia civil nr. 1107/1962 n Culegerea de Decizii ale Tribunalului Suprem pe anul 1962, p. 152. 19 n acest sens a se vedea D. Cosma, Teoria general a actului juridic civil, Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1969, p. 177 20 D. Cosma, op. cit. p. 174. 21 Aurel Pop, Gheorghe Beleiu, Curs de drept civil. Partea general., Bucureti, 1975, p. 282. 22 D. Cosma op. cit., p. 174 23 See, Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, Roman Law, ansa S.R.L. Publishing House, Bucharest, 1995, p. 168. 24 According to some authors, psychic violence is configured as a consent vice in Justinians age. See Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, op. cit., p. 328. 25 The new four private crimes: metus, dolus, rapina and fraus creditorum, and old crimes are: theft, in iuria and damnum in iuria datum. 26 Forced will is still will. See Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, op. cit., p. 328, I. C. Ctuneanu, Elementary course of Roman Law, 2nd edition, Cartea Romneasc S. A. Press, Bucharest, 1924, p. 390. 27 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390. 28 The full name of actio erade actio quod metus causa. See I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390. 29 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390, Emil Molcu, Dan Oancea, op. cit., p. 328, C. Stoicescu, Elementary course of Roman Law, 2nd edition, National Tipography Jean Ionescu, et comp., Bucharest, 1927, p. 235. 30 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 390. 31 I. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 391. 32 I. C. Ctuneanu, op. cit., p. 391. 33 See, Ada Hurbean, Consent vices, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2010, p. 180 181. 34 Ada Hurbean, op. cit., p. 181. 35 Gheorghe Beleiu, Romanian Civil Law. Introduction in civil law. Subjects of civil law, 7th edition, revised and completed by Marian Nicolae and Petric Truc, Juridical Universe Press, Bucharest, 2001, p. 154. Moise Bojinc, Roman Civil Law. General theory, 5th edition updated and improved, Academica Brncui Press, Tg Jiu, 2007, Gabriel Boroi, Civil Law. General Part. Persons, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2002, p. 16. 36 Law no. 287/2009 regarding the Civil Code was published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, nr. 511 from 24th of July 2009. 37 Gabriel Boroi, op. cit., p. 169, Ion Dogaru, Nicolae Popa, Dan Claudiu Dnior, Sevastian Cercel, Civil Law Basics, Volume I. General Theory. C. H. BECK Press, Bucharest, 2008, p. 454. 38 Gheorghe Beleiu, op. cit., p. 156. 39 Ion Dogaru, Nicolae Popa, Dan Claudiu Dnior, Sevastian Cercel, op. cit., p. 455. 40 Supreme Court, civil decision nr. 1107/1962 in the Selection of Supreme Court decisions in 1962, p. 152. 41 See also D. Cosma, General theory of civil juridical act, Scientific Press, Bucharest, 1969, p. 177 42 D. Cosma, op. cit. p. 174. 43 Aurel Pop, Gheorghe Beleiu, Civil Law Course. General Part., Bucharest, 1975, p. 282. 44 D. Cosma op. cit., p. 174
13

12

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 1/2011

16