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

3/2009

ORDINEA PUBLIC N DREPTUL INTERNAIONAL PRIVAT

PUBLIC ORDER IN 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. Cuvinte cheie: ordinea instana de judeca, drepturi public, lege,

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

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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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. 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,

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 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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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 Universit ii Constantin Brncu i din Trgu Jiu, Seria Litere i tiin e 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