Post by account_disabled on Dec 30, 2023 20:05:23 GMT -8
Athe court found that the plaintiff did not submit the translation of the documents attached to the preliminary application and pursuant to art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure he suggested that to the extent that he wishes to prevail on the documents attached to the action to submit the legalized translation of them made by an authorized translator. However under the conditions in which Romania ratified the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities through Law no. the Romanian Constitution included a series of provisions regarding the rights of Romanian citizens who belong to national minorities including the provisions of art. para.
Given that both the translations performed by an authorized Country Email List translator and the legalization of some translations cost money the author of the exception of unconstitutionality shows that if he complies with the provisions of art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure it follows that its provisions lack the content of the invoked constitutional regulation. . The Harghita Court The as wellfounded because the provisions of art. para. of the civil procedure code impose additional expenses on.
Romanian citizens who belong to national minorities in the conditions where the Basic Law expressly states that the methods of exercising the right to express oneself in ones mother tongue in front of the courts must be established so as not to involve additional expenses for those interested. . According to art. para. from Law no. the referral conclusion was communicated to the presidents of the two Chambers of the Parliament the Government and the Peoples Advocate in order to express their views on the exception of unconstitutionality. . The Government appreciates that the criticized legal provisions fall into the category of those that establish obligations in the person of the person who claims a right or requires.
Given that both the translations performed by an authorized Country Email List translator and the legalization of some translations cost money the author of the exception of unconstitutionality shows that if he complies with the provisions of art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure it follows that its provisions lack the content of the invoked constitutional regulation. . The Harghita Court The as wellfounded because the provisions of art. para. of the civil procedure code impose additional expenses on.
Romanian citizens who belong to national minorities in the conditions where the Basic Law expressly states that the methods of exercising the right to express oneself in ones mother tongue in front of the courts must be established so as not to involve additional expenses for those interested. . According to art. para. from Law no. the referral conclusion was communicated to the presidents of the two Chambers of the Parliament the Government and the Peoples Advocate in order to express their views on the exception of unconstitutionality. . The Government appreciates that the criticized legal provisions fall into the category of those that establish obligations in the person of the person who claims a right or requires.