Materiale asemănătoare
- Raportul dintre infracţiunea de spălare de bani [Art. 29 alin. (1) Lit. c din Legeanr. 656/2002] şi infracţiunea de tăinuire [Art. 270 alin. (1) Cod penal]
- Conţinutul constitutiv al infracţiunii de spălare de bani
- Probleme de teorie și practică judiciară în legătură cu traficul și consumul ilicit de droguri
- Prevenirea şi combaterea evaziunii fiscale – un imperativ al societăţilor moderne
- Legislative Actions of Estonia to Combat Organized Crime
Autor: Constantin NEDELCU
Publicat în: Challenges of the Knowledge Society 2017
Disponibil online: aici.
Abstract: This study represents an in-depth analysis of the rulings of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, by the Panel for clarifying certain legal issues. In actuality, it is about the way in which the Supreme Court ruled when issuing such a decision, respectively the Decision no. 16/2016, the conclusions reached being explained and sometimes criticized. In addition, the study identifies other aspects that receive different classification solutions in the judicial practice, which generates a non-unitary practice in criminal matters.
Keywords: money laundering; multiple crimes; multiple regulations; the author of the predicate crime.
