Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr.

3/2009

ORDINEA PUBLIC N DREPTUL

PUBLIC ORDER IN

INTERNAIONAL PRIVAT

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

Lect. univ. dr. Laura Magdalena

TROCAN
Universitatea Constantin Brncui din
Trgu-Jiu

PhD Laura Magdalena TROCAN

Constantin Brncui University of TrguJiu

Rezumat:
Aplicarea unei legi strine, n mod normal
aplicabil conform regulilor de conflict, poate fi
refuzat de tribunal dac legea strin contrazice
principiile fundamentale ale ordinului juridic
naional. Coninutul noiunii de ordin public al
dreptului internaional privat este al principiilor
fundamentale ale legii lor, aplicabile n relaiile
juridice de drept internaional privat. Procedural, ea
se manifest prin excepia ordinului public
internaional.

Abstract:
L'application
d'une
loi
trangre,
normalement applicable conformment aux rgles en
conflit, peut tre refuse par le tribunal si la loi
trangre est contraire aux principes fondamentaux
de l'ordre juridique national. Le contenu de la notion
de l'ordre public de droit international priv est des
principes fondamentaux de la loi du for, applicables
dans les les relations juridiques de droit international
priv. Procdural elle se matrialise par lexception
dordre public international.

Cuvinte cheie: ordinea

instana de judeca, drepturi

Key words: public order, law, trial instance, rights

public,

lege,

Aplicarea
unei
legi
strine,
competent potrivit normelor conflictuale,
poate fi refuzat de instana de judecat dac
legea
strin
contravine
principiilor
fundamentale ale ordinii juridice naionale.
Ordinea public de drept internaional privat
romn este format din ansamblul
principiilor fundamentale de drept ale statului
romn, aplicabile n raporturile juridice cu
element de extraneitate1. Astfel, coninutul
noiunii de ordine public de drept
internaional privat l constituie principiile
fundamentale de drept ale statului forului,
aplicabile n raporturile juridice de drept
internaional privat. Acest coninut se
determin de ctre instana de judecat2. n
unele cazuri, legiuitorul romn nsui
stabilete explicit normele juridice a cror
nclcare constituie un temei de invocare a
ordinii publice de drept internaional privat
romn i, deci, de nlturare de la aplicare a
legii strine contrare3.
Procedural ea se materializeaz prin

The application of a foreign law,

competent according to conflicting norms,
can be refused by the trial instance if the
foreign law is contrary to the main principles
of national public order. Public order of
Romanian international private law is formed
of the ensemble of the main principles of law
of the Romanian state, which will be applied
in juridical rapports with an element of
extraneity14. So, the content of the notion of
public order if private international law is
realized of the main principles of the law of
the state of the forum, that will be applied in
juridical rapports of private international
law15. In some cases, the Romanian legislator
establishes explicitly the juridical norms
whose breaching is a basis of invocation of
public
order
if
Romanian
private
international law so, alienation from
application of the contrary foreign law 16.
Procedural it is materialized by the
exception of public order of private
international law. This exception is the
procedural means that will be applied by the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

147

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

excepia de ordine public de drept

internaional privat. Aceast excepie este
mijlocul procedural aplicabil de ctre instana
forului pentru a nltura efectele legii
strinnormal competente s se aplice
raportului de drept internaional privat, dac
acestea contravin legislaiei forului i
principiilor funadmentale pe care aceasta se
bazeaz.
n trecut nlturarea aplicrii legii
strine era rar ntlnit deoarece conflictele
ntre cutume apreau mai ales n relaiile
interprovinciale, iar cutumele diferitelor
ceti cuprindeau reguli relativ asemntoare.
Totodat, dreptul roman constituia sursa
comun de inspiraie pentru sistemele
juridice ale Europei continentale, ceea ce
permis meninerea unei anumite coeziuni. n
secolul al XIV-lea, bartolitii disting ntre
statutele favorabile, menite s protejeze
persoana fizic n diverse raporturi juridicestatute extrateritoriale-i statutele odioase
care aduceau restricii sau care priveau
bunurile. Statutele odioase se aplicau, chiar i
n limitele teritoriului care le-a edictat doar
cetenilor i erau privite cu rezerv ntruct
mpiedecau relaiile comerciale dintre ceti.
n doctrin s-a apreciat c acest sistem de a
respinge aplicarea unor statute ca odioase
apare ca o desemnare, cu anticipaie de
secole, a noiunii de ordine public, n
virtutea creia, n dreptul modern, anumite
legi strine sunt nlturate din cauz c ele
contravin, prin efectele lor, intereselor locale.
n doctrina olandez a secolului al XVII-lea
apare ideea respingerii aplicrii legii strine,
dac ea contravine intereselor forului; legea
strin nu se va aplica nici mcar n virtutea
curtoaziei internaionale dac aduce atingere
ordinii juridice locale. ncepnd cu secolul al
XIX lea utilizarea excepiei de ordine public
n dreptul internaional privat ia amploare
sub influena a mai muli factori: apariia
codificrilor ce accentueaz particularitile
fiecrei legislaii naionale, dezvoltarea
mijloacelor de comunicare contribuie la
intensificarea relaiilor dintre locuitorii
statelor ndeprtate, rezerva manifestat de

instance to the forum to alienate the effect of

the foreign law that is normally competent to
be applied to the Romania private
international law, if these are contrary to the
legislation of the forum and main principles
on which this is based.
In the past, the alienation of
application of foreign law is seldom met as
conflicts between common laws appeared
especially in inter-provincial relation, and
the common laws of different citadels
contained rules that have been quite similar.
Still, the Romanian law was the common
source of inspiration for juridical systems of
continental Europe, which allowed the
maintenance of certain cohesions. In the
XIVth century, the Bartol distinguished
between favorable statutes, which are due to
protect physical person in diverse juridical
rapports extra territorial statutes and
detestable statutes that brought restrictions or
that aimed goods. The detestable statutes
were applied, even in the limits if the
territory that edicted them only to citizens
and were regarded with reserve as prevented
the commercial relations between citadels. In
the doctrine was appreciated that this system
to reject the application of some statutes as
being detestable appears as a designation,
with anticipation of centuries, of the notion
of public order, in the virtues of which, in
modern law, certain foreign laws are
alienated because they interfere with,
through their effect to the local interest. In
Dutch doctrine of the XVII th century,
appears the idea of rejection of application of
foreign law, as it interferes to the interests of
the forum; the foreign law will not be
applied in the virtue of the international
courtesy if it damages the local juridical
order. Starting with the XIX century, the use
of the exception of public order in private
international law takes proportions under the
influence of many factors: apparition of the
coefficient that accentuates the particularities
of each national legislation, the development
of the communication means to the
intensification
ofthe relations between

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

148

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

judectorii rii forului fa de legea strin

agsit excepia de ordine public un mijloc
foarte comod de revenire la lex fori4. Bartin
n Frana i Christian von Bar n Germania
sunt cei care au sitematizat concepia asupra
excepiei de ordine public n dreptul
internaional privat, acceptat astzi de toi
autorii i consacrat n cvasitotalitatea
codificrilor moderne de drept internaional
privat, precum i n conveniile internaionale
n materia conflictelor de legi.
Astfel, n decursul acestui secol va fi
elaborat o ntreag teorie privind ordinea
public de drept internaional privat, lunduse ca punct de plecare ordinea public de
drept intern, fr ns a se confunda cu
aceasta.
Elementele specifice ale ordinii
publice n dreptul internaional privat sunt
urmtoarele: din punct de vedere spaial, are
un caracter naional, n sensul c ordinea
public se interpreteaz prin prisma dreptului
romn5; ordinea public apare ca un corectiv
excepional n aplicarea legii strine ntruct
dei legea strin ar fi fost normal
competent s se aplice, efectele ei nu se vor
produce pentru raportul juridic n discuie6,
iar de aici rezult i faptul c ordinea public
este de strict interpretare, ea neputnd s fie
interpretat extensiv, ci numai resrictiv;
ordinea public este diferit n ceea ce
privete coninutul su de la o ar la alta7;
ordinea public este diferit n ceea ce
privete coninutul su, n cadrul aceluiai
stat, n timp; ordinea public este actual, n
sensul c dac din momentul naterii
raportului juridic i pn n momentul
litigiului n legtur cu acest raport juridic s-a
schimbat coninutul ordinii publice, nu se ia
n considerare coninutul acesteia din
momentul naterii raportului juridic, ci cel
din momentul litigiului8.
Practica judiciar i legea arat c
ordinea public poate fi invocat n orice
raport juridic de drept material sau de drept
procesual cu element de extraneitate.
Totodat,
invocarea
ordinii
publice
presupune deosebiri eseniale ntre legea

inhabitants of the far away states, the reserve

is manifested by judges of the country of the
forum in front of the foreign law that found
an expectation of public order that is easy to
return to lex fori17. Bartin in France and
Christian von Bar in Germany are the ones
that systemized the conception on the
exception of public order in private
international law, accepted today by all
authors and consecrated in quasi-totality of
the modern codes of private international
law, as well as international conventions in
matter of laws conflicts.
So, during this century will be issued
an entire theory regarding public order of
private international law, taking as departure
points the public order of internal law; not
being in confrontation with it.
Specific elements of public order in
private international law are the following:
from spatial point of view, has a national
character, in the sense that public order is
interpreted from the point of view of
Romanian law18; public order appears as an
exceptional correction in application of
foreign law as foreign law would be
normally applied, its effects did not produced
for the juridical rapport in discussion19, from
here results the fact that public order is of
strict interpretation, not being interpreted
extensive, but only restrictive; public order is
different in which concerns its content from
one country to another20; public order is
different in the sense that if from the moment
of birth of the juridical rapport and until the
litigation moment in connection with this
juridical rapport was changes the content of
public order, it will not be taken into
consideration its content in the moment of
appearance of the juridical rapport but in the
litigation moment21.
The judicial practice and law shows
that public order can be invoked in any
juridical rapport of material law or of process
law with extraneity element. Still, the
invocation of public order supposes essential
separation in foreign law, normal competent
and the law of the forum. Even so, certain

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

149

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

strin, normal competent i legea forului.

Cu toate acestea anumite domenii ale
raporturilor juridice de drept internaional
privat sunt susceptibile, ntr-o mai mare
msur, de a ridica probleme de ordine
public i anume: starea civil, capacitatea i
relaiile de familie ale persoanelor fizice.De
asemenea, n cazul nclcrii competenei
execlusive a jurisdiciei romne, conform
prevederilor art. 168, alin. 1, pct. 2 coroborat
cu art. 151 din Legea 105/1992 cu privire la
reglementarea
raporturilor
de
drept
internaional privat.
Extrem de important de subliniat este
i faptul c ordinea public de drept
internaional privat nu se confund cu
normele de aplicare imediat. Ordinea
public se invoc dup ce s-a desemnat legea
strin ca fiind competent i mpotriva
acesteia pentru a nu fi aplicat, acordndu-se
ntietate legii forului care se substituie celei
strine. Norma de aplicare imediat intervine
ntr-un moment diferit, deoarece nu
presupune desemnarea prealabil a legii
strine. Norma de aplicare imediat intervine
deoarece se consider c raportul juridic
respectiv exprim interese sociale att de
importante, nct nu se poate aplica dect
legea forului. Unele particulariti prezint i
relaia dintre ordinea public de drept
internaional privat i retrimitere. Aadar,
retrimiterea presupune o neconcordan ntre
norma conflictual a forului i norma
conflictual strin, care determin conflictul
negativ de legi, pe cnd ordinea public
presupune nu numai o neconcordan, ci i
deosebiri eseniale, de principiu, ntre legea
material a forului i legea strin9.
Ordinea public de drept internaional
privat romn i cea de drept intern10 prezint
drept asemnri urmtoarele aspecte: scopul
ambelor instituii const n protecia juridic
a intereselor fundamentale ale statului
forului, izvorul comun este dreptul intern,
dei ordinea de drept internaional privat are
i izvoare internaionale; finalitatea este
aceeai: nlturarea aplicrii unei legi.
Deosebirile dintre cele dou instituii privesc

fields of juridical rapports of private

international law are susceptible, to a greater
extent, to raise problems of public order,
namely: civil status, capacity and family
relations of physical persons. Also, in case of
breaching the exclusive competence of the
Romanian jurisdiction, in conformity with
provisions art. 168, alin. 1, pct. 2
corroborated with art. 151 from Law
105/1192 regarding settlement of rapports of
private international law.
Extremely important to mention is the
fact that public order of private international
law does not face norms of immediate
application. Public order will be invoked
after was designated foreign law as being
competent and against this not to be applied,
granting priority to the law of the forum that
will be substituted to the foreign one. The
norm of immediate application interferes in a
difficult moment, as it does not suppose
preliminary designation of the foreign law.
The norm of immediate application interferes
as it is not considered that the juridical
rapport expresses social interest that are so
important, as can not be applied to the law of
the forum. Some particularities present the
relationship between public order of private
international law and remitting. So, remitting
supposes a non conformity between conflict
norm of the forum and the foreign conflict
norm, which determines the negative conflict
of laws, meanwhile public order supposes
not only a non conformity, but also essential
differences, of principle, between the
material law of the forum and foreign law22.
Public order of Romanian private
international law and the one of internal
law23 presents as similarities the following
aspects: the purpose of both institutions
resides in the juridical protection of the main
interests of the state of the forum, the
common source of the internal law, even of
the order of private international law has
international sources; the finality is the same:
the alienation of the application of some law.
The differences between the two institutions
regard the fact that their functions differs in a

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

150

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

faptul c funciile acestora difer n mod

susbstanial, astfel n timp ce ordinea public
de drept intern stabilete principiul libertii
ncheierii actelor juridice de ctre pri,
ordinea public de drept internaional privat
indic limitele aplicrii legii strine n statul
forului.
De asemenea, sferele celor dou
noiuni sunt deosebite. Nu toate normele de
ordine public n dreptul intern sunt de
ordine public n dreptul intrenaional privat.
Astfel, ordinea public de drept intern are o
sfer mai larg dect ordinea public de drept
internaional privat. Explicaia acestui fapt
rezid n faptul c statul reglementeaz cu
mai mult fermitate raporturile juridice de
drept intern dect pe acelea de drept
internaional privat, deoarece, n acest ultim
caz, sistemul de drept al forului intr n
corelaie cu un sistem de drept strin, iar
incompatibilitile
reciproce
trebuie
nlturate pe ct posibil, pentru a se permite
desfurarea normal a raporturilor juridice
dintre subiectele de drept din cele dou state
i pentru a se favoriza executarea reciproc a
hotrrilor judectoreti11.
Examinarea practicii judectoreti
romne de comer internaional pune n
eviden faptul c au existat mai multe
situaii n care reglementri de ordine public
n dreptul intern nu au fost considerate de
ordine public n raporturile cu element de
extraneitate. Astfel, termenele de prescripie
extinctiv, care sunt de ordine public n
dreptul intern, nu sunt de ordine public i n
dreptul internaional privat, aa nct dac
norma conflictual romn trimite la un
sistem de drept strin, iar acesta conine alte
termene de prescripie dect cele din dreptul
romn, aceste termene se vor aplica de ctre
intanele romne.
De
asemenea,
o
hotrre
judectoreasc nemotivat pronunat ntr-un
stat n care acest lucru este legal, nu ncalc
ordinea public de drept internaional privat
romn, i deci poate primi exquatur n
Romnia, dei n dreptul comun romnesc, n
afara unor excepii strict prevzute de lege,

substantial manner, so that meanwhile public

order of internal law established the principle
of liberality of conclusion of juridical
document by the parts, public order of
private international law indicates the limits
of application of the foreign law in the state
of the forum.
Also, the spheres of the two notions
are different. Not all norms of public order in
the internal law are of public order in private
international law. So, public order of internal
law has a larger spore than the public order
of private international law. The explanation
of this fact resides in the fact that state settles
with more stability the juridical rapports of
internal law than the ones of private
international law, as, in the latest case, the
system of law of the forum enters in
correlation with a system of foreign law, and
reciprocal
incompatibilities
must
be
alienated as possible, to allow the normal
development o the juridical rapports between
law subjects of the two states and to favorize
the reciprocal execution of the trial
decisions.24.
The examination of the Romanian
judicial practice of international commerce
underline the fact that existed several
situation in which settlements if public order
from internal law have not been considered
of public order in rapports with extraneity
elements.
So,
terms
of
extinctive
prescription, which are of public order in
internal law, are not of public order in
private international law , so that is the
Romanian conflict norm sends to a system of
foreign law, and this will contain other
prescription terms than the ones of Romanian
law, these terms will be applied by
Romanian law courts.
Also, an unmotivated trial decision
pronounced in a state where this is normal
does not breach the public order of
Romanian private international law and so,
can receive exquatur in Romania, even if in
Romanian common law, besides some
exceptions mentioned by law, trial decisions
must be motivated, the requirements being

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

151

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

hotrrile judectoreti trebuie motivate,

cerina fiind imperativ. O instituie juridic
necunoscut dreptului romn aplicat n
cadrul unei hotrri judectoreti strine a
crei executare se cere n Romnia, nu
contravine, n principiu, ordinii publice de
drept internaional privat romn. Ea poate
contraveni acestei ordini publice numai dac,
pe fond, ncalc principiile fundamentale de
drept ale statului forului12.
Conform art. 8 din Legea 105/1992
cu privire la reglementarea raporturilor de
drept internaional privat aplicarea legii
strine se nltur dac ncalc ordinea
public de drept internaional romn, situaie
n care se va aplica legea romn. De aici
rezult c n dreptul internaional privat
romn ordinea public are dou efecte: un
efect negativ ceea ce presupune c legea
strin este pur i simplu nlturat n ceea ce
privete aplicarea ei i un efect pozitiv care
presupune c n locul legii strine se va
aplica legea romn. Trebuie precizat c n
materia drepturilor ctigate excepia de
ordine public cunoate o restrngere, n
sensul c unele drepturi, odat nscute n stat
strin sunt recunoscute n ara forului, chiar
dac acestea n-ar fi putut lua natere pe
teritoriul forului pentru c ordinea public sar fi opus. Cu toate acestea, efectul atenuat al
invocrii ordinii publice n materia
drepturilor ctigate n statul strin nu se
produce automat n toate cazurile, instana
fiind suveran s aprecieze n fiecare caz n
parte dac un asemenea drept produce sau nu
efecte juridice i n caz afirmativ, n ce
msur13.

imperative. An unknown juridical institution

of the Romania law that is applied as a part
of foreign trial decision whose execution will
be requested in Romania, does not go
against, as a principle, public order of
Romanian private international law. It can go
against this public order only if, on the base,
infringes the main principles of law of the
state of the forum25.
According to art. 8 from Law
105/1992 regarding settlement of rapports of
private international law the application of
foreign laws will be alienated if infringe the
public order of Romanian international law,
in this situation being applied the Romanian
law. From here results the fact that in
Romanian private international law, public
order has two effects: a negative effect which
supposes that foreign law is simply alienated
in which concerns its application and a
positive effect which supposes that instead of
foreign law will be applied Romanian law. It
must be mentioned the fact that in matter of
rights gained, the exception of public order
knows a restriction, in the sense that some
rights, once appeared in the foreign state are
known in the country of the forum, even if
they could not be born on the territory of the
forum as public order was not opposed. With
all these, the attenuated effect of invocation
of public order in matter of rights gained in
the foreign state is not produced
automatically in all cases, the instance being
sovereign to appreciate in each case if such
right produces or not juridical effect and in
affirmative case, to what extent 26.
Bibliography

Bibliografie
I. Chelaru, Gh. Gheorghiu, Drept
internaional privat, Editura C. H. Beck,
Bucureti, 2007
I. Filipescu, A. Filipescu, Tratat de drept
internaional privat, Editura Universul
Juridic,Bucureti, 2005
M. Mihil, Elemente de drept
internaional public i privat, edit. All Beck,

I. Chelaru, Gh. Gheorghiu, Private

international law, C. H. Beck Publishing
House, Bucharest, 2007
I. Filipescu, A. Filipescu, Treaty of private
international
law,
Universul
Juridic
Publishing House, Bucharest, 2005
M. Mihil, Elements of public and private
international law, All Beck Publishing
House, Bucharest, 2001

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

152

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

Bucureti, 2001
D. Al. Sitaru, Drept internaional privat,
Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 2000
O. Ungureanu, C. Jugastru, Manual de
drept internaional privat, Editura All Beck,
Bucureti, 1999
Legea 105/1992 cu privire la reglementarea
raporturilor de drept internaional privat

D. Al. Sitaru, Private international law,

Lumina Lex Publishing House, Bucharest,
2000
O. Ungureanu, C. Jugastru, Manual of
private international law, All Beck
Publishing House, Bucharest, 1999
Law 105/1992 regarding settlement of
rapports of private international law.

Potrivit dispoziiilor art. 8, alin. 1 din Legea nr. 105/1992 cu privire la reglementarea raporturilor de drept
internaional privat, aplicarea legii strine se nltur: dac ncalc ordinea public de drept internaional privat
sau dac a devenit competent prin fraud. n conveniile internaionale care constituie izvoare ale dreptului
internaional privat, ordinea public este prevzut n linii generale. Astfel, n Convenia de la New-York pentru
recunoaterea i executarea sentinelor arbitrale strine din 1958, n art. V, alin. 2, lit. b prevede c recunoaterea
i executarea unei sentine arbitrale strine poate fi refuzat, printre altele, dac este contrar ordinii publice a
statului solicitat. De asemenea, n Statutul FMI n art. VIII, ali. 2, lit. b se arat: Contractele de schimb valutar
care privesc moneda unui stat membru i care sunt contrare reglementrii din acel stat referitoare la schimb,
reglementare meninut sau impus n conformitate cu acest Statut, vor fi neexecutorii pe teritoriul oricrui stat
membru.
2
Instana de judecat va stabili cnd o norm din sistemul de drept romn consacr un principiu juridic
fundamental al statului nostru, astfel nct nclcarea lui de ctre legea strin competent n spe poate s
justifice nlturarea acestei legi de la aplicare.
3
Ex. art. 18, alin. 2 din Legea 105/1992 cu privire la reglementarea raporturilor de drept internaional privat,
care consacr caracterul de ordine public de drept internaional privat al principiului libertii de a ncheia o
cstorie pentru cetenii romni. Textul precizeaz c, dac una din legile strine care constituie legea naional
a oricruia dintre viitorii soi, la care trimite norma conflictual privind condiiile de fond ale cstoriei, din art.
18, alin. 1, prevede un impediment la cstorie care, potrivit dreptului romn, este incompatibil cu libertatea de a
ncheia o cstorie, acel impedimet va fi nlturat ca inaplicabil, n cazul n care unul din viitorii soi este
cetean romn i cstoria se ncheie pe teritoriul Romniei.
4
O. Ungureanu, C. Jugastru, Manual de drept internaional privat, Edit. All Beck, Bucureti, 1999, p. 48.
5
D. Al. Sitaru, Drept internaional privat, Edit. Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 2000, p. 116.
6
n literatura de specialitate au fost formulate mai multe opinii privind cazurile n care poate interveni ordinea
public n dreptul internaional privat precum: legea strin este contrar unei anumite politici legislative a
forului, legea strin contravine concepiei statului forului despre justiie sau moral, legea strin aduce
prejudicii relaiilor internaionale etc. ( I. Filipescu, A. Filipescu, Tratat de drept internaional privat, Edit.
Universul Juridic,Bucureti, 2005, p. 117).
7
Astfel, n unele ri n care nu se admite divorul sau se admite n condiii restrictive, o aciune de divor a unor
strini va fi respins ca fiind contrar ordinii publice a forului. Art. 22 din Legea 105/1992 cu privire la
reglementarea raporturilor de drept internaional privat prevede c dac legea strin determinat potrivit
dreptului internaional privat romn nu permite divorul sau l admite n condiii deosebit de restrictive, se aplic
legea romn, n cazul n care unul din soi este la data cererii de divor, cetean romn.
8
Ex. n Spania, dup cderea regimului lui Franco a fost acceptat recunoaterea hotrrilor de divor pronunate
n strintate sau dup intrarea n vigoare n 1975 a dispoziiilor privind divorul prin consimmnt mutual, n
Frana se accept de asemenea recunoaterea divorului n strintate.( O. Ungureanu, C. Jugastru, op. cit., p.
51).
9
I. Filipescu, A. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 116.
10
n dreptul intern, ordinea public arat caracterul imperativ al unei norme juridice de la care prile nu pot
deroga prin actele lor juridice.
11
D. Al. Sitaru, op. cit., p. 111.
12
Ibidem, p. 112.
13
Ex. legea strin care permite poligamia nu-i va putea gsi aplicare ntr-o ar care n-o cunoate, pentru
ncheierea unei cstorii de ctre o persoan deja cstorit, dar o cstorie odat ncheiat, chiar de o persoan
deja cstorit n ara sa i dup legea sa, va putea fi luat n considerare n ara care nu cunoate poligamia, n
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

153

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiine Sociale, Nr. 3/2009

privina unor efecte juridice, de exemplu privitor la pensia de ntreinere.(M. Mihil, Elemente de drept
internaional public i privat, Edit. All Beck, Bucureti, 2001, p. 214).
14
According to disposals of art. 8, alin. 1 from Law no. 105/1992 regarding the settlement if rapports of private
international law, the application of the foreign law will be alienated: if it breaches the public order of private
international law or if it becomes competent by fraud. In international conventions which makes sources of the
private international law, public order is seen in general lines. So, in Convention from New-York for recognition
and execution of the arbitral foreign sentences from 1958, in art. V, alin. 2, lit. b mentions that recognition and
execution of a foreign arbitral sentences can be refused, among others, if it is contrary to public order of the
required state. Also, in the Statute of FMI in art. VIII, alin. 2, lit. b it is shown that: Exchange contracts
regarding currency of a member state and which are contrary to settlements from that state, regarding exchange,
regulation maintained or imposed, in conformity with that Statute, will not be executive on the territory of each
member state.
15
The trial instance will establish when a norm from the system of Romanian law preserves a main juridical
principle of our state, so that its breaching by the competent Romanian law can justify the alienation of this law
of application. .
16
Ex. art. 18, alin. 2 from Law 105/1992 regarding settlements of rapports of private international law, which
preserves the character of public order of private international law of the principle of freedom to conclude a
matrimony for Romanian citizens. The text mentions that, if one of foreign laws which makes the national law of
any of the future couple, to which the conflict norm sends regarding basic conditions of the matrimony, from
art. 18, alin. 1, mentions an impediment to matrimony, which, according to Romanian law, is incompatible with
the freedom to conclude matrimony, this impediment will be alienated as not being applicable, in case one of the
future couple is a Romanian citizen and matrimony will be concluded on the territory o Romania.
17
O. Ungureanu, C. Jugastru, Manual of private international law, All Beck Publishing House, Bucharest,
1999, p. 48.
18
D. Al. Sitaru, Private international law, Lumina Lex Publishing House, Bucharest, 2000, p. 116.
19
In the specialty literature have been formulated several opinions regarding cases in which public order can
interfere in private international law as: foreign law is contrary to certain legislative politics of the forum, foreign
law is contrary to the conception of the statute of the forum on justice and moral, foreign law brings prejudices to
international relations. ( I. Filipescu, A. Filipescu, Treaty of private international law, Universul Juridic
Publishing House, Bucharest, 2005, p. 117).
20
So, in some countries in which divorce will not be admitted or will be admitted in restrictive conditions, a
divorce action of some foreign persons will be rejected as being contrary to the public order of the forum. Art. 22
from Law 105/1992 regarding the settlement of the rapports of private international law mentions that foreign
law is determined according to Romanian private international law does not allow divorce or allows it in
especially restrictive conditions, will be applied the Romanian law, in case one part of the couple, is at the
moment of the divorce request, Romanian citizen.
21
Ex. in Spain, after the fall of Francos regime was accepted the recognition of the divorce decisions
pronounced abroad or after entrance in force, in 1975 of disposals regarding divorce through mutual agreement,
in France will be accepted also the recognition of divorce abroad.( O. Ungureanu, C. Jugastru, op. cit., p. 51).
22
I. Filipescu, A. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 116.
23
In internal law, public order presents the imperative character of a juridical norm to which parts can not
derogate through their juridical documents.
24
D. Al. Sitaru, op. cit., p. 111.
25
Ibidem, p. 112.
26
Ex. foreign law which allows polygamy will not found an application in a country that does not know, to
conclude a matrimony by a person that is already married, even if that person already married in his country and
in conformity with its law, will be able to be taken into consideration in the country that does not recognize
polygamy, regarding some juridical effects, for example, regarding maintenance allowance.(M. Mihil,
Elements of public and private international law, All Beck Publishing House, Bucharest, 2001, p. 214).

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Letters and Social Sciences Series, Issue 3/2009

154