Raspunderea civila delictuala este regementata de codul civil in art 998- 1003.

Raspunderea civila delictuala este, astfel:

1. pentru fapta proprie

2.pentru fapta ilicita a altei persoane

3. raspunderea pentru prejudiciile cauzate de lucruri ori animale

4.raspunderea proprietarului pentru prejudiciile produse prin ruina unor constructii care ii apartin

Notiuni generale:

Faptul juridic ilicit care da nastere obligatiei de despagubire se numeste delict civil.

Raspunderea civila poate fi delictuala si contractuala, dupa cum prejudiciul rezulta din faptul ilicit cauzator de prejudicii sau din neexecutarea ori executarea necorespunzatoarea obligatiei contractuale.

Raspunderea civila delictuala este o sanctiune civila cu caracter reparator.

Ce e important de stiut este faptul ca, neavand un caracter de pedeapsa, raspunderea civila se transmite mostenitorilor autorului faptului prejudiciabil.

As the pastor of a large church, many things come across my desk asking for my support/backing/endorsement.  It is rare for me to participate in such things.  With that said, The Manhattan Declaration strikes at the very heart of those things that Southern Baptist hold so dear.  I can tell you that I signed this document without hesitation.

More than 150 Evangelical, Orthodox and Catholic leaders signed the statement, which was released to the media last Friday. You can click here to read the nearly 5,000-word declaration in its entirety, but basically it defends three core issues—the sanctity of human life, biblical marriage and uncompromising religious liberty. All three are issues that, unfortunately, are in grave danger in our great country today. I am providing just a few words here on what the declaration states:

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.

God’s people cannot afford to be complacent as government and secularist attempt to force the Lord’s people and the Lord’s church to participate in those things that press against our most foundational beliefs and convictions. I want to encourage you to read the document.  Pass this link on to others.  Stand firm by your convictions and pray that the Lord will protect and preserve this great country as we yield ourselves to the principles and precepts of His Word.  Soli Deo Gloria—to God alone be the Glory!

Watch National Equality March on VJnet.org

On October 11, 2009 I went to Washington DC for the National Equality March Rally with David b and Brian G from TheOccasionalFag.com podcast.

equalityacrossamerica.org

Soundtrack
Fragile Day by A Northern Chorus
This Is Modern Love by Bloc Party
Part of the PodsafeMusicNetwork.com

Blowin’ In The Wind by Jay Brannan

Lady Gaga
Cynthia Nixon
Judy Shepard

Subscribe to the video podcast at VJnet.org | 347-68-VJNET [347-688-5638] | vjnetcast[at]gmail.com | VJnetcast.com | A BustB!G and Live Your Dreams Production | Part of the Airstream Podcasting Network

68.2 of the Swiss voters have rejected the popular initiative for a ban on exports of commodities, infrastructure and know how for military purposes. Only hours after being announced this result has been widely commented. Although it was clear from the beginning that the idea did not stand the slightest chance, especially not in the current crisis.

We can be glad for no less than seven reasons for this outcome.

First of all, it would not have made the world a better place. If Swiss companies do not sell their aircraft someone else will. For instance, Pilatus Aircraft will be able to deliver 25 PC-21 trainers to the United Arab Emirates.

This leads to the second argument. Highly qualified jobs will be preserved and precious know how remains in Switzerland. Even if left wing activists often say the opposite, the arms industry in general and aerospace in particular remains a high value adding and know how intensive sector. This is more than a welcome addition to a national economy confronted with a crisis.

Third, a “yes” to end exports would not have improved the image of Switzerland abroad. The contrary would have been true. Our banks have suffered enormously and have to reinvent themselves. Fortunately our aerospace and arms industry remains what it has to be: a trustworthy partner.

Fourth, far more than the directly concerned jobs would have been lost. The more a sector is specialized and high tech-oriented, the more it sustains suppliers, service providers and other activities.

A fifth risk would have been the erosion of technological know how crucial for other sectors as well. Examples are civil aerospace, civil engineering or systems and components. The Swiss industry as a whole would have suffered.

A sixth argument is the capacity of the companies to recycle themselves. Adaptations of specialized workers, what the employees of the aerospace and military industry are, are extremely difficult. All successful examples show that the time lag is extremely long.

The final and seventh argument is the capacity to innovate of the Swiss arms industry. Its products and services have always been trendsetters. If they were forced to close down, it is doubtful whether hypothetical successors will achieve the same level of reputation for long.

What do you think about the above observations? How do you see the prospects of Swiss military and civil aerospace?

Daniel Stanislaus Martel

This is where issue of marriage is particularly crucial. In effect, whilst civil partnerships, unions are a step in the right direction (to borrow form the phrase pool of Rudd) they are not equal to marriage. Civil unions are legally recognised for residents within the three states and territories present within Australia. In addition these unions also vary from state to state in the level of protection offered by the Government, some may receive adoption rights, whilst in another state couples may only receive property rights. Civil union may not even be portable, two may be considered ‘life partners’ in one state, and nothing legally binding in another. Marriage offers an entirety of protection, it establishes a spouse as the next-of-kin, substitute blood relatives in the eyes of the law. This title is essential for loving couples, as it provides peace of mind, knowing that your partner may have an official say in medical, property or funeral matters. Marriage is also legally recognised by all Governments across the globe (currently between a man and a woman, but this stresses the importance of the global community to expand the notion of marriage), and it can be performed anywhere and still be recognised, which is more than what can be said for civil – unions. Theoretically these unions were designed to provide protection and equality for single sex relationships, whilst remaining separate from marriage. Why? – To keep the sanctity of marriage in tact, to not redefine the notion of marriage, to keep the status quo. On those points I feel it is essential to meticulously dissect each argument for the purpose of revealing the sheer paradoxical and illogical beliefs behind this lack of equality.

This is one of the underlying factors in the heads of Government, regarding its stance on the debate. Again I evidence the idea that 60% of the population in support of gay marriage, with figures even higher in the youth of the nation. This continued stance is an insult to the ideals of democracy as the Australian public. The country is not ruled through communism, nor through any aspect of fascism, yet it would appear that elements are applicable in this case. The fact is, that this Australian Government is deaf to the pleas of the majority of the population, which directly contravenes the right of the tax paying population to be heard by their leaders. We do not live in a fascist country, but in regards to this issue, it appears that there is a sense of democratic dictatorship in the air. This merely evidences the idea that the Government must keep a somewhat conservative stance in order to retain funding from sponsors and large business. Yet whilst the country is based on the notions of capitalism, let it not rule in the political spectrum.

————————————————————-

   M-am bucurat să găsesc acest comentariu în formă electronică, şi cred că va prinde bine şi vouă, celor interesaţi în drept. Iată link-urile  spre întreaga carte de comentarii la Codul Civil.

Comentariu Carte 1, art.  1-283

Comentariu Cartea II art 284-511

Comentariu Cartea III art 512-992

Comentariu Cartea IV art. 993-1431

Comentariu Cartea V art 1432-1575

A Embraer e a segunda maior companhia aérea austríaca, a NIKI Luftfahrt GmbH, assinaram contrato para mais dois jatos EMBRAER 190, confirmando direitos de compra do contrato original anunciado em julho de 2008. O início das entregas desta nova encomenda está previsto para o primeiro semestre de 2011.

“É uma grande honra para a Embraer ter a NIKI reafirmando sua confiança no EMBRAER 190 por meio da confirmação destes direitos de compra apenas seis meses após o recebimento do primeiro E-Jet”, disse Mauro Kern, Vice-Presidente Executivo da Embraer para o Mercado de Aviação Comercial. “Estamos realmente satisfeitos em ver os nossos E-Jets auxiliando a NIKI no inovador e restritivo mercado de baixo custo.”

Beneficiando-se do inigualável e baixo custo operacional dos E-Jets, bem como seu consumo de combustível e nível de emissão de poluentes reduzidos, a NIKI se tornou a primeira empresa aérea de baixo custo européia a operar o EMBRAER 190 com 112 assentos, otimizado pararotas de média demanda, juntamente com aeronaves narrowbody convencionais com capacidade de 150 a 210 assentos, otimizadas para rotas com grande demanda.

“O EMBRAER 190 se encaixa muito bem na nossa estratégia de crescimento e nos ajudará a ser uma empresa lucrativa pelo quinto ano consecutivo”, disse Niki Lauda, fundador e Presidente da NIKI Luftfahrt GmbH.

“Complementando a nossa frota de narrowbody, o EMBRAER 190 nos proporciona maior cobertura de mercado e o desenvolvimento de melhores oportunidades de negócios, oferecendo o mesmo nível de conforto aos nossos passageiros.”

FONTE/FOTO: Embraer

There is no doubt, in a Catholic belief system homosexuality is intrinsically “wrong.” However, there is a direct lack of evidence why. It is almost as though if questioned, a believer would merely say (in a more eloquent manner) “because God said so.” If as human beings we were to believe and worship everything with more power than ourselves then where would I society be headed? Would there be any scientific development? Would there be any progression of humanity?This other terribly discriminatory ideology that homosexual relationships have the capacity to devalue or in effect hinder a heterosexual relationship is completely illogical. How can a relationship that you have no knowledge of, destroy your relationship? In regards to homosexual marriage, American comedian Wanda Sykes puts it into a humorous colloquialism, “If you don’t believe in same-sex marriage, then don’t marry somebody of the same-sex.” Marriage is another topic that is too lengthy to delve into right now, however, people argue that the sanctity of marriage must be protected at all costs. However, marriage existed before religion, before Christianity, before Islam, before Judaism. In fact many of modern church practices (the use of candles, incense, etc.) were derived from the more ritualistic services of paganism. The Church’s view on homosexuality is clear and concise. Clarity is usually beneficial in most situations. But the passion at which the Church argues that these acts of homosexuality are “wrong” has a direct relationship to the amount of discrimination that exists in the wider society. One might even go so far as to argue that it could be the one of the underlying factors in the higher rate of suicide in gay teens. It an absolutely appalling statistic that approximately 30% of GLBT youths will attempt suicide. The Church is also used as a justification for violent and discriminatory acts. Matthew Shepherd’s death is a tragic example of the extent to which fear and text can motivate someone. Imagine if it were you, tied to a fence post, beaten to a bloody pulp and left to die. Why? Merely because of the colour of your skin, the type of men you found attractive, your religion, your political beliefs, the way in which you desired to express your sexuality and who you were as a person.

This cycle of discrimination has to be stagnated. If not for the safety of the GLBT community, but so that we can function and develop as a species. The Church had made its stance loud and clear, but there must be logical and rational Christians and Catholics that see the flaw and larger consequences that this stance creates, not only for homosexuals, but for the wider human society.“Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice.” -Wrong. Homosexuality is not a choice of lifestyle, but more of a part of a person perceives himself or herself to be. Modern psychology states that homosexuality is at least 30-70% genetic, therefore it can’t simply be argued that a man or woman wakes up one morning and decides that from this point in their lives that they will be homosexual. This is not to be confused with a period of discovery that many homosexuals undertake, but as Erikson defined in his stages of psychological development that all teens undergo this stage when they are attempting to find themselves and who they are as a person. The detrimental influence of society also creates this fear amongst many of today’s youth that instills into them a fear of being themselves. Not only around their peers, but also with family and even by themselves. Hiding from one self may also lead to many psychological problems in latter life.

To place this in context the quote was articulated to be within the town of Sodom, and the two “men”? Well they were said to be angels of God. The ideologies contained within in the quote are not direct and clear. To begin the quote itself does not exclusively denote the act of homosexuality. But also in addition to this it does not even state that the abuse of the two angels was intended to be sexual. Regardless of the implications, even if this was intended to be sexual abuse, then would this simply mean that “Yahweh” as described in Genesis was condemning Rape, Sexual Abuse and Nonconsentual Sex? Rather than jumping to the discriminatory conclusion of homosexuality? Angels were beings completely void of sexual sin; meaning that even if women intended the same actions it could be stated that this would be “wicked” in the context as well.

The simple fact of the matter is, that Sodom was not an exclusively homosexually inclined town, but a cacophony of sinning did occur. Rape, murder, incest, bestiality were all the norms of this province, meaning that one cannot simply jump to the simplest conclusion to merely justify their own beliefs.