RESTRAINING ORDER IN THE ROMANIAN LEGISLATION AND PRACTICE

The protection of the family (especially women and children) consists of important provision in both the international and internal laws of the states. Unfortunately, in Romania, the incidence of domestic violence is high, an aspect that we will highlight in our paper. In this article we aim to analyse the latest legislative changes in the field of protection order, with reference to the provisional protection order. Regarding the temporary restraining order, it is regulated by Order no. 146/2578/2018 (Minister of Internal Affairs and Minister of Labor and Social Justice, 2018) on how to manage cases of domestic violence by police officers. Through this normative act, the necessary framework was created so that the police can intervene quickly when phenomena of domestic violence are registered and to ensure the immediate protection of the victims of aggressors. The police officers assess the risk situation in each case, and it may be ordered to issue a temporary restraining order until the competent court rules on the situation created for a longer period of up to 6 months, with the possibility of extending it. We will also present some relevant cases. Over the last 10 years, the protection of the family (especially women and children) has made some important progress both in terms of legislation and practice. Unfortunately, the level of domestic violence is still significant and, in addition to the legislative measures we will refer to in the article, more measures are needed to educate the population and raise awareness of the severity of this phenomenon that affects the integrity and physical and mental development of victims.

The Problem of Responsibility for Impacts and Prevention of Family (Home) Violence: The Administrative and Legal Aspect

The article raises the issue of administrative responsibility for family (domestic) violence. The authors suggest that within the framework of administrative legislation, the court should be able to issue a restraining order to the victim, as well as more effectively apply re-socialization measures against persons brought to justice under Article 6.1.1 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences. This, as the authors believe, can partly solve the problem of preventing family (domestic) violence.

PROTECTION ORDER: INTERNATIONALSTANDARDS, FOREIGN EXPERIENCE AND NATIONAL PRACTICE

The article is devoted to the experience of using a protection order to protect victims of domestic or domestic violence. The article provides an overview of relevant international documents, considers the experience of a number of foreign countries, as well as the experience of Uzbekistan. The article notes that along with the concept of "protection order", there are the concepts of "restrainingorder", "protective order", "injunction", "restraining order", etc. In the practice of foreign countries, as a rule, there are 2 types of protective orders -issued for a shorter period (by the police) and for a longer period (by the court). In parallel with the protection order procedure, the victim has the right to apply to the court for compensation and prosecution of the aggressor

A Client’s Crisis Becomes a Legal Crisis

In 2005, the Supreme Court found in Castle Rock v. Gonzales that a domestic violence victim had no constitutional right to the enforcement of her restraining order. The Court’s decision precipitated a legal crisis for advocates and a personal crisis for Jessica Gonzales (Lenahan). This chapter explores the strategy decisions that went into pursuing her case at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IAHCR) and an assessment of the outcome/results. It also explores the Community Oriented and United Responses to Address Gender Violence and Equality (COURAGE) in Policing Project, an outgrowth of Lenahan v. United States. Finally, it explores the ways in which these and other issues such as international human rights, police response, and gender bias play out today: the election of President Donald Trump, coupled with the rise of the #MeToo movement, have put these crises in sharp relief, particularly for domestic violence survivors who are women of color, immigrant women, and LGBTQ individuals.

Telegram: deconstructing one of the biggest blockchain cases of 2020

Purpose To discuss and analyze the facts and circumstances of the October 11, 2019 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York temporary restraining order halting the distribution of cryptocurrency tokens in SEC v. Telegram Group Inc. Design/methodology/approach Provides an overview of the case, an analysis of the Court’s ruling, details on the final resolutions, and some key takeaways. Findings Given the lack of judicial precedent in this area, as well as the size and profile of the Telegram project, the Telegram case was closely watched by blockchain industry participants and represents a significant development for this emerging market. The Telegram court’s approach, if broadly adopted, could prove very challenging for those attempting to launch decentralized networks involving blockchain-based tokens. Practical implications The Telegram case represents just one court’s view and is based on a very fact-specific inquiry. However, given the Court’s apparent deference to the SEC’s positions on the facts at hand, and the lack of judicial precedent in this area, the blockchain industry should pay close attention to this decision. Originality/value Expert guidance from lawyers with extensive experience in blockchain technologies, digital currencies, securities offerings and litigation, investment funds and financial services.

Tax Enforcement Procedure Under Section 104 of Personal Income Tax Act: Matters Arisings

The refusal of a taxpayer to respond or pay the tax due has always provoked the tax authority to approach the court with an ex-parte application in chambers. The result of this ex parte application arms the tax authority with a restraining order. With a detached team of policemen, the tax authority will storm the premises of the taxpayer, vandalize, forcefully drive out the tax payer and seal up the premises. All these arrangements and decisions are done behind the taxpayer. This paper examined the constitutionality of the entire procedure for the recovery of tax due to the tax payer. The paper utilized doctrinal methodology in analyzing the extant laws and case laws as they relate to the subject matter. The paper submits that decisions under section 104 PITA are too weighty to be taken in the absence of the taxpayer. The paper, therefore, recommends some sort of judicial activism by judicial officers in exercising their discretion and accommodate the interest of the taxpayer.

Providing police with an urgent restraining order as a special measure to combat domestic violence in administrative offenses

The article presents a model of complementation of functions of authorized units of the National Police and distinguishes their actions in the general mechanism of preventive activity in preventing and combating domestic violence. Urgent injunction against the abuser is a special measure to counter domestic violence, used by authorized units of the National Police of Ukraine as a response to the fact of domestic violence and aimed at the immediate cessation of domestic violence, eliminating the danger to life and health of victims and preventing injuries and preventing injuries. committing such violence. The conditions for its removal are the existence of a direct threat to the life or health of the victim. The current procedure for issuing an urgent restraining order by police involves the use of a special measure to counter domestic violence against the offender in the situation of committing physical domestic violence as a criminal offense, not an administrative offense. The Code of Administrative Offenses does not provide for measures to ensure administrative offenses against offenders in order to end domestic violence. At the same time, the Code of Criminal Procedure contains a provision allowing restrictive measures to be applied to a person suspected of committing domestic violence as a criminal offense. The lack of adequate regulatory support in the Code of Administrative Offenses concerning the issuance of an urgent restraining order as a special measure limits the preventive activity of units of the National Police of Ukraine in countering domestic violence as an administrative offense. The authors of the article propose to supplement Chapter 20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, as well as to streamline the order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of 01.08.2018 №654 and the interagency order of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of 13.03.2019 № 369/180. The proposed changes do not contravene the Law of Ukraine "On the National Police", which allows a police officer to require a person (persons) to leave a certain place for a certain period or to prohibit or restrict persons from access to a designated territory or objects, if necessary for the protection of life and health. people.