Sunteți pe pagina 1din 8

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

3/2014

JURISPRUDENA IZVOR DE DREPT JURISPRUDENCE - A SOURCE OF


LAW
*
Titu IONACU

Abstract: Practica judiciar, dei nu este Titu IONACU**


considerat , n dreptul romnesc, izvor de drept, este
considerat ca fiind deosebit de valoroas n procesul Abstract: Judicial practice, although it is
interpretrii i aplicrii legii la cazuri concrete. not considered in the Romanian law, sources of law,
is considered particularly valuable in the
Cuvinte cheie: jurispruden, practic
interpretation and application of the law to specific
judiciar, competen, instane judectoreti cases.

Key words: law, judicial practice,


competence, court
1. Noiune
Jurisprudena sau practica judiciar
este alctuit din totalitatea soluiilor i 1. Concept
hotrrilor judectoreti pronunate de Jurisprudence and legal practice
ctre instanele de toate gradele, prin care consists of all solutions and judgments by
s-au interpretat sau aplicat normele courts at all levels, which have been
juridice la diferite situaii concrete. Din interpreted or applied legal standards
punct de vedere etimologic, cuvntul different situations. Etymologically
jurispruden provine din cuvintele speaking, the word "law" comes from the
latine juris, insemnnd drept i dictio, Latin words "juris" means right and
semnificnd pronunare, iar la origine, "dictio" signifying references and
jurisprudentia desemna arta i tiina originally Jurisprudence " appoint legal art
juridic, n societatea contemporan. and science in contemporary society.
Jurisprudena este un izvor de drept Case law is a formal source of law
formal ce include experiena practic a which includes practical experience
organelor judectoreti ce aplic dreptul judiciary applying positive law and that
pozitiv i cruia i probeaz i legitimeaz proves it legitimizes validity. It should be
valabilitatea. Trebuie menionat faptul c noted that the case is the result of
jurisprudena este rezultatul interpretrii i interpretation and law enforcement,
aplicrii dreptului, realizat de organul conducted by the judicial body according
judiciar potrivit voinei legiuitorului care to the will of the legislature that approves
a edictat norma de drept. n dreptul the rule of law. The current Romanian law
romnesc actual, prin de finiie, by the finite case and judicial precedent is
jurisprudena i precedentul judiciar nu not a source of positive law, the judge
constituie izvor de drept pozitiv, having the duty to obey the law and to
judectorul avnd ndatorirea de a se apply it in letter and spirit8.
supune legii i de a o aplica n litera i Jurisprudence in relation to the
spiritul ei1. law, has three forms which distorts or
Jurisprudena n raport cu legea, transforms dead letter law: case law

* Conf. univ. dr., Departamentul tiine Juridice, Facultatea de Relaii Internaionale, Drept i tiine
Administrative, Universitatea Constantin Brncui din Tg-Jiu
* Assoc.Proff.Ph.D, Department of Juridical Sciences, Faculty of International Relations, Law and
Administrative Sciences, Constantin Brncui University of Tg-Jiu

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
31
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

cunoate trei forme care denatureaz sau required under the law, a delegating law
transform legea n liter moart: (secundum legem), which can not be
jurisprudena obligatorie n virtutea legii, challenged as a source of law, because its
a unei delegri a legii (secundum legem), power comes from the law, it does not
care nu poate fi contestat ca izvor de change or supplement the law, but only
drept, deoarece puterea ei vine din lege, determines its application strictly
aceasta nu modific i nu completeaz praeterita case legem (in addition to the
legea, ci doar determin aplicarea ei strict, law), it is intended to complement the law
jurisprudena praeter legem (n and replace it where there legislative gaps
completarea legii), aceasta are rolul de a by praeterita legem interpretation, which
completa legea sau de a o suplini acolo is a kind of creative interpretation of the
unde exist lacune legislative, prin law by the judge; legem praeterita case,
interpretarea praeter legem, care although formal kept within legal text
constituie un tip de interpretare creatoare basically distorts the content rule legal
a legii de ctre judector; jurisprudena standing to its limit.
praeter legem, dei formal se pstreaz n Although the law is not
limitele textului legal, practic deformeaz contradicted by praeterita legem
coninutul normei juridice, situndu-se la interpretation changes subtly, its content.
limita acestuia. This is allowed only to the extent that
Cu toate c legea nu este legal texts are outdated and obsolete. Case
contrazis, prin interpretarea praeter law contra legem (against the law) in
legem se modific, n mod subtil, modern law could not exist. By law contra
coninutul acesteia. Aceasta nu este legem interpretation of the law the judge
admis dect n msura n care textele gives a contrary one considered by the
legale sunt nvechite i desuete. legislature, and this is permissible only if
Jurisprudena contra legem (mpotriva legal rules that are anachronistic, being
legii) n sistemele moderne de drept nu ar overcome by the development of society
putea exista. Prin jurispruden contra and thus transforming the law a dead
legem judectorul d legii o interpretare letter.
ntr-un sens contrar celui avut n vedere de
ctre legiuitor, iar aceasta este admisibil 2. Historical Evolution
doar n msura n care normele legale Judicial practice is the emanation
respective constituie anacronisme, ele of judicial authority, the previous law that
fiind depite de dezvoltarea societii i source of law. Jurisprudence and legal
astfel transform legea n liter moart. practice had the same role in all systems
of law, its role has varied from one
2. Evoluie istoric historical epoch to another, from one
Practica judiciar este emanaia country to other. In antiquity and
autoritii judiciare, fiind anterioar legii feudalism (as is customary) law has been a
ca izvor de drept. Jurisprudena sau important source of law, which then
practica judiciar nu a avut acelai rol n diminished in modern European countries
toate sistemele de drept, rolul su a variat along with the percentage growth laws.
de la o epoc istoric la alta, de la o ar la In Rome the king was judge and
alta. n antichitate i feudalism (la fel ca i creator of legal rules while case is an
cutuma), jurisprudena a constituit un important source of law, which formed the
izvor de drept important, care s-a diminuat basis of evolution right. After creating
apoi n epoca modern n rile europene o royalty decisions Pretoria called edicts,
data cu ponderea creterii actelor became mandatory for all judges forming

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
32
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

normative. praetorian law, also called as honorary


n Roma regele era judector i represents a formal source of law. With
creator de norme juridice n acelai timp, the formation of the Empire, the role
jurisprudena fiind un izvor de drept praetors decreases the king is the one who
important, ce a constituit fundamentul makes the laws. The entire coding
evoluiei dreptului. Dup crearea Justinian Roman law and abolishes the
regalitii, hotrrile pretorilor, denumite creative power of praetorian law and
edicte, au devenit obligatorii pentru toi solicitor.
magistraii formnd dreptul pretorian, In the thirteenth century arose in
denumit i drept onorar ce reprezint un England collection of case law referred
izvor formal al dreptului. Odat cu reports. In countries where the law is
formarea imperiului, rolul pretorilor represented by the common law (England,
scade, mpratul fiind cel ce face legile. USA, Canada etc.) there is the view that
Astfel, mpratul Iustinian codific the right meaning given by the courts, so
ntregul drept roman i desfiineaz the content of legal norms is determined
puterea creatoare a dreptului pretorian i a by case law (eg. Judgments of the Privy
jurisconsulilor. Council of the House of Lords in
n secolul al XIII-lea au aprut n England). In these circumstances, the
Anglia colecii de jurispruden denumite judge was regarded as authority creates
reports. n rile n care dreptul este law which establishes new rules 9 as
reprezentat prin common law (Anglia, permanent. In relation to these rules, the
SUA, Canada etc.) exist concepia c law was seen as auxiliary subsidiary
nelesul dreptului este cel dat de (existing laws are considered simple
instanele judectoreti, deci, coninutul corrective jurisprudence), common law
normelor juridice este determinat n (common law) being regarded as having
precedentul judiciar (ex. Hotrrile date objective existence even if it was not
de Consiliul privat al Camerei Lorzilor n expressed in the papers.
Anglia). n aceste mprejurri, judectorul Increasing the power of the
era considerat ca fiind autoritatea care monarch in European countries, and the
creeaz dreptul, care instituie reguli noi de increasing role accompanied by encoding
drept2 cu caracter permanent. n raport cu laws have reduced the scope of
aceste reguli, legea era privit ca fiind jurisprudence (eg Criminal Code of
auxiliar, subsidiar (legile existente fiind Germany and the French Civil Code
considerate simple corective ale practicii forbade its application). Case law loses its
judiciare), dreptul comun (common law) role as the main source of law, leaving a
fiind considerat ca avnd o existen subsidiary source of law. During the
obiectiv chiar dac nu era exprimat n French bourgeois revolution, the role of
acte. judicial practice was limited. When
Creterea puterii monarhului n adopting the French Civil Code of 1804,
rile din Europa, precum i creterea Portalis said that there should be a law
rolului actelor normative nsoite de with the role of fill in the gaps of the law,
codificri, au redus cmpul de aplicare al while claiming that "all matters must be
jurisprudenei (de exemplu, Codul penal al regulated by law (...) abandoned
Germaniei i Codul civil francez au jurisprudence rare and extraordinary and
interzis aplicarea ei). Jurisprudena i the contingency of laws. "
pierde treptat rolul de izvor principal de With time, some current and legal
drept, rmnnd un izvor subsidiar de schools were ordered to unfavorable
drept. n timpul Revoluiei burgheze maintaining jurisprudence from formal

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
33
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

franceze, rolul practicii judiciare s-a sources of law. This was motivated by the
limitat. Cu ocazia adoptrii Codului Civil fact that resistance to new case law, can
francez din 1804, Portalis afirma c not provide models appropriate legal
trebuie s existe o jurispruden cu rol de social change. Also, the case loses its
a umple golurile legii, susinnd n acelai importance and due to normative
timp c, toate materiile trebuie development activities of the state.
reglementate de legi (...) abandonnd
jurisprudenei cazurile rare i 3. The role of jurisprudence
extraordinare precum i cele neprevzute Contemporary Romanian law does
de legi. not grant legal practice quality source of
Cu timpul, unele curente i coli law, because the principle of separation of
juridice s-au pronunat chiar defavorabil powers and the legality, the judiciary is
meninerii practicii judiciare ntre not competent to legislate (to create law),
izvoarele de drept formal. Acest lucru era but to apply the law that is enacted by the
motivat de faptul c jurisprudena opune Parliament (the legislative power state).
rezisten la nou, neputnd oferi modele Moreover, the Romanian Civil Code
juridice corespunztoare schimbrilor expressly prohibits the judge determines
sociale. De asemenea, jurisprudena i create legal rules by a judgment which
pierde din importan i ca urmare a pronounced. Article 4 of our Code Civil
dezvoltrii activitii normative a statului. has "the judiciary can only resolve
disputes between individuals, giving the
3. Rolul jurisprudenei ruling applied only case without a general
10
Dreptul romnesc contemporan, nu and permanent ".
acord practicii judiciare calitatea de izvor Mandatory magistrates to decide
de drept, pentru c, potrivit principiului cases based only on the law, without
separaiei puterilor n stat i al legalitii, create new rules of law and without being
puterea judectoreasc nu este competent bound by judicial precedent, results from
s legifereze (s creeze legea), ci doar s the provisions of Art. 124, pt. 3 of the
aplice legea care este edictat de Constitution of Romania11, that: Judges
Parlament (ca putere legislativ n stat). are independent and subject only to the
De altfel, Codul civil romn stabilete law, without being bound by the
expres interdicia ca judectorul s creeze judgments in similar cases by other judges
norme juridice prin hotrrea pe care o or even her, and to establish general
pronun. Art.4 din Codul nostru provisions that create new legal rules
civil dispune: puterea judectoreasc nu when solving a reason.
poate dect s rezolve litigiile ntre There are cases in judicial practice
indivizi, dnd hotrri aplicabile numai for whose solution there legal provisions
speei i far caracter general i or even if there is not sufficient or clear
permanent3. enough, but the judge is obliged to settle
Obligativitatea magistrailor de a the principles of law specific and legal
soluiona cauzele numai n baza legii, far conscience, otherwise is guilty of denial
a crea noi reguli de drept i far s fie of justice. In such cases, the judge will
inui de precedentul judiciar, rezult i decide after other legal requirements,
din dispoziiile Art. 124, pct. 3 din without which deciding a case to compel
Constituia Romnie4, conform cruia: him or other judges to decide the same in
judectorii sunt independeni i se supun other case, the respect of the principles
numai legii, far a fi legai de hotrrile which it stops giving general solutions 12.
pronunate n cauze similare de ali The judgment of the judge in a case

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
34
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

judectori sau chiar de ei, i far a putea shall be binding only to cause to give (for
stabili dispoziii generale prin care s the present case in question) not for other
creeze noi norme juridice, cu ocazia similar cases. The judicial prectica does
soluionrii unei pricini. not create new legal rules, but only to
Exist ns situaii n practica interpret or supplement existing ones or
judiciar pentru a cror soluionare nu adapt to new conditions life of society. It
exist prevederi normative sau chiar dac is estimated that the practice of judicial
exist nu sunt suficiente sau destul de bodies is of particular importance in the
clare, dar pe care judectorul este obligat rule of law, even as a subsidiary source of
s le rezolve conform principiilor de drept law, which is particularly valuable in
specific i contiinei sale juridice, n caz solving the many problems social,
contrar se face vinovat de denegare de economic and political.
dreptate. n astfel de cazuri, judectorul se From the above, we can define the
va pronuna dup alte norme juridice, far following features of jurisprudence:
ca ceea ce decide ntr-o spe s-l oblige emanating from a public authority or
pe el sau pe ali judectori s decid la fel judicial authority, is of a formal, legally
i n alte spee, respectnd astfel binding to specific cases, has written,
principiul care-l oprete s dea soluii cu which gives them accurate, earlier law, in
caracter general5. terms of its appearance, is evolutionary
Hotrrea pronunat de judector dynamic printed social needs, had a
ntr-o cauz are for obligatorie numai creative role in law has a role in the
fa de cauza pentru care s-a dat (numai interpretation and application of the law to
pentru spea respectiv) nu i pentru alte specific cases, completing the law when
cauze similare. n prectica judiciar nu se incomplete.
creeaz norme juridice noi , ci numai se Although not receiving the right to
interpreteaz sau se completeaz cele consider the source of contemporary
existente sau se adapteaz noilor condiii Romanian as though the judicial activity
de via ale societii. Se apreciaz c of the Constitutional Court can enforce the
practica organelor judiciare prezint o Constitution even the legislature,
importan deosebit ntr-un stat de drept, declaring unconstitutional any act issued
chiar i ca izvor subsidiar de drept, by it. So, by jurisdiction, the
aceasta fiind deosebit de valoroas n Constitutional Court established a law can
procesul rezolvrii multiplelor probleme ignore the will of the legislature,
social-economice i politice. jurisprudence arising important decisions
Din cele prezentate, putem contura that can confirm or refute the direct rules
urmtoarele trsturi caracteristice ale legal persons adopted by the legislative
jurisprudenei: eman de la o autoritate body. Also decisions of the Court
public, respectiv autoritatea Supreme Court to resolve appeals on
judectoreasc, are un caracter oficial, points of law, the Attorney General's
are fora juridica obligatorie pentru complaint are general-binding as law, all
cazurile concrete, are form scris, fapt courts.
ce-i confer precizie, este anterioar legii, In most cases, courts reach
sub aspectul apariiei sale, are caracter solutions in the interpretation and
evolutiv, dinamic, imprimat de nevoile application of legal rules. In case of
sociale, a avut un rol creator n drept, are conflict between lower courts, the
rol n interpretarea i aplicarea legii la Supreme Court requires such an
cazuri concrete, completeaz legea cnd interpretation, the constant and consistent
este lacunar . delivery of solutions (decisions of the

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
35
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

Dei nu primete n dreptul Plenum Supreme Court), they find contemporan


romnesc considerarea de sometimes invoked judicial precedent izvor de drept, totui
activitatea judiciar judicial activity. Decisions, however, not
a Curii Constituionale poate impune complete, do not develop the law nor not
respectarea Constituiei chiar i create new rules of law, but explains the
legiuitorului, prin declararea real meaning of a legal norm (it interpret);
neconstituionalitii oricrui act emis de they are not a source of law and not
ctre acesta. Deci, prin competena sa, binding judges, but may be considered in
Curtea Constituional instituie o certain cases by the courts, given the
jurispruden ce poate nesocoti voina prestige and position of authority from
legiuitorului, jurispruden din care which it emanates.
rezult decizii importante care pot s It should be noted that after
confirme sau s infirme n mod nemijlocit, Romania joined the Council of Europe
normele juridice adoptate de forul (the October 2, 1993) has ratified the
legislativ. De asemenea, deciziile European Convention on Human Rights13
pronunate de Curtea Suprem de Justiie (20 June 1994) so that in addition to adapt
n soluionarea recursurilor n interesul domestic legislation provisions, the case
legii, la sesizarea Procurorului General, law of the Strasbourg Court has become
sunt general-obligatorii, ca i legea, pentru an active stimulus for the national courts,
toate instanele. which are interested to deliver solutions
De cele mai multe ori, instanele de that not can be challenged by the
judecat ajung la soluii unitare n Strasbourg Court. Thus, taking into
interpretarea i aplicarea unor norme account by the Court in each process that
juridice. n cazul existenei conflictelor is related to a solution already given by
dintre instanele inferioare, Curtea the Court and that could give solving the
Suprem de Justiie impune acestora o case. Romanian Constitutional Court takes
anumit interpretare, prin pronunarea into account the jurisprudence of the
unor soluii constante i unitare (decizii Strasbourg Court14 when ruling on the
ale Plenului Curii Supreme de Justiie), constitutionality of laws or provisions of
acestea find invocate uneori ca precedente law, as the Constitutional Court
judiciare n activitatea judectoreasc. recognizes the direct applicability of the
Deciziile ns, nu completeaz, nu European Court of Human Rights.
dezvolt legea i nici nu creeaz norme
noi de drept, ci doar explic sensul real al
unei norme juridice (l interpreteaz);
acestea nu sunt izvor de drept i nu au
caracter obligatoriu pentru judectori, dar
pot fi avute n vedere, n anumite cazuri,
de ctre instanele de judecat, date fiind,
prestigiul i poziia organului de la care
eman.
Trebuie menionat faptul c dup
aderarea Romniei la Consiliul Europei (la
2 octombrie 1993) s-a ratificat Convenia
European a Drepturilor Omului 6 (20 iunie
1994) astfel c pe lng adaptarea legislaiei
interne la prevederile acesteia, jurisprudena
Curii de la Strasbourg a

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
36
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

devenit un stimulent activ pentru


instanele naionale, ce sunt interesate s
pronune soluii care s nu poat fi
contestate de Curtea de la Strasbourg.
Astfel, se ine cont de jurisprudena Curii
n cadrul fiecrui proces care are legtur
cu o soluie deja pronunat de Curte i
care ar putea da rezolvare cazului dat.
Curtea Constituional a Romniei ine
cont de jurisprudena Curii de la
Strasbourg7, atunci cnd se pronun
asupra constituionalitii unei legi sau a
unor dispoziii dintr-o lege, astfel Curtea
Constituional recunoate aplicabilitatea
direct a jurisprudenei Curii Europene a
Drepturilor Omului.

1Elena Paraschiv, Izvoarele formale ale dreptului , Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucureti, 2007, p.92
2 Instanelor anglo-saxone li se recunoate puterea de a crea att norme individuale, aplicabile la cazuri
concrete, ct i norme generale asemenea legilor, precedentul judiciar fiind obligatoriu, att n cazul soluionat ,
ct i n cazuri viitoare , pentru instana care l-a creat i pentru celelalte instane care soluioneaz cazuri
similare.
3Nicolae Popa, Teoria general a dreptului, Ed. Actami, Bucureti, 1994 ,p.195
4 n Art.124 pct.3 din Constituia Romniei se stabilesc dou cerine, care de fapt sunt principial
constituionale: independena judectorului i supunerea judectorului numai legii. A se vedea n acest sens
Ioan Muraru, E.S. Tnsescu (coordonatori), Constituia Romniei. Comentariu pe articole, Ed. C.H. Beck,
Bucureti, 2008, p.1221-1225.
5Ion Dobrinescu, Dreptatea i valorile culturii, Ed. Academiei Romne, Bucureti, 1992, p.44
6 Convenia pentru Protecia Drepturilor Omului i Liberalitilor Fundamentale, cunoscut i su b denumirea
de Convenia European a Drepturilor Omului, este un catalog al drepturilor fundamentale elaborat de Consiliul
Europei, semnat pe 4 noiembrie 1950 la Roma i intrat n vigoare pe 3 septembrie
1953.
7 Curtea de la Strasbourg numit i Curtea European a Drepturilor Omului a fost creat pentru sistematizarea
procedurii plngerilor n materria drepturilor omului provenite din statele membre ale
Consiliului Europei. Misiunea Curii este s vegheze la respectarea prevederilor Conveniei Europene a
Drepturilor Omului de ctre statele semnatare.
8Elena Paraschiv, Formal sources of law, Ed. CH Beck, Bucharest, 2007, p.92
9 Anglo-Saxon courts are recognizing the power to create both individual rules applicable to specific cases and
general rules also laws, judicial precedent is binding both to solve and in future cases, the court created for
other courts that settled similar cases.
10 Nicolae Popa, General Theory of Law, Ed. Actami, Bucharest, 1994, p.195
11In item 3 Article 124 of the Constitution of Romania to establish two requirements that are actually
constitutional principles: the independence of the judge and the judge obedience only to the law. See this John
Muraru, E. S. Tanasescu (coordinators), Constitution of Romania. Comment on articles, Ed. C. H. Beck,
Bucharest, 2008, p.1221-1225.
12 Ion Dobrinescu, Justice and cultural values, Ed. Romanian Academy, Bucharest, 1992, p.44
13 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Liberties, known as the European
Convention on Human Rights, is a catalog of fundamental rights developed by the Council of Europe, signed in
Rome on 4 November 1950 and entered into force on 3 September 1953.

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
37
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2014

14 Strasbourg Court called the European Court of Human Rights was created to systematize the procedure
Materr human rights complaints from Council of Europe member states. Its job is to ensure compliance with
the European Convention on Human Rights by the signatory States.

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2014
38