Obligatia de Intretinere

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr.
3/2010
ASPECTE TEORETICE I DE THEORETICAL AND JUDICIAL

PRACTIC JUDICIAR PRIVIND PRACTICE ASPECTS REGARDING
OBLIGAIA DE NTREINERE THE SUPPORTING OBLIGATION
DINTRE PRINI I COPIL N BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILD IN
REGLEMENTAREA CODULUI THE REGULATION OF THE FAMILY
FAMILIEI I A NOULUI COD CIVIL CODE AND THE NEW CIVIL CODE
Dr. Alin-Gheorghe GAVRILESCU - Lector PhD Alin-Gheorghe GAVRILESCU

universitar University Lecturer
Catedra de Drept Law Chair
Facultatea de tiine Juridice i Litere Faculty of Juridical Sciences and Letters
Universitatea Constantin Brncui din Constantin Brncui University of Trgu-
Trgu-Jiu Jiu
Abstract: Regarded in its finality, that of Abstract: Regarded in its finality, that of
assuring the material conditions to fulfill the child's assuring the material conditions to fulfill the child's
growth, education and professional training liabilities, growth, education and professional training
parent's obligation to support him represents one of liabilities, parent's obligation to support him
the specific duties that give a form to the judicial represents one of the specific duties that give a form
institution of parental care. Specific requirement of to the judicial institution of parental care. Specific
children support by parents or adopter is that the state requirement of children support by parents or
of need of the minor is determined by the particular adopter is that the state of need of the minor is
situation in which it is found, being placed in a period determined by the particular situation in which it is
of training following a school and is preparing for a found, being placed in a period of training following
profession or occupation, which prevent him from a school and is preparing for a profession or
achieving income from work even if according to the occupation, which prevent him from achieving
law he would be able to work. Until otherwise income from work even if according to the law he
provided, the minor is supposed to be in need, unlike would be able to work. Until otherwise provided, the
the major creditor of the support obligation, which, minor is supposed to be in need, unlike the major
contrary to evidence, it is assumed not being in need, creditor of the support obligation, which, contrary to
considering that, with capacity for work, he has means evidence, it is assumed not being in need, considering
of support. that, with capacity for work, he has means of support.
Keywords: obligation, child, parent's, debtor, Keywords: obligation, child, parent's, debtor,
creditor creditor
I. Obligaia de ntreinere dintre I. The Supporting Obligation

prini i copil n reglementarea Codului between Parents and Child in the
familiei Regulation of the Family Code
1.1. Noiuni introductive. 1.1. Introductory Notions.

Reglementare Regulation
Privit n finalitatea ei, aceea de a Regarded in its ending, the one to
asigura condiiile materiale pentru ndeplinirea provide the material conditions needed in
Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2010
109
Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2010
sarcinilor de cretere, educare i pregtire order to accomplish the tasks to raise, educate
profesional a copilului, obligaia prinilor de and professionally train the child, the parents
a-l ntreine reprezint una din ndatoririle obligation to support him or her represents one
specifice care dau coninut instituiei juridice a of the specific duties that define the juridical
ocrotirii printeti. institution of the parental protection.
Obligaia prinilor de a ntreine The parents obligation to support their
copilul i are izvorul n art. 86 alin. 1 Codul child has its source in art. 86, paragraph 1 of
familiei care arat c obligaia de ntreinere Family Code that shows that the supporting
exist ntre prini i copii, ns, datorit obligation exists between parents and children,
aspectelor specifice pe care aceast obligaie but, due to the specific aspects this obligation
le prezint atunci cnd copiii sunt minori presents when the children are minor, the
legiuitorul se refer la ea i n capitolul I din legislator also refers to it in chapter I of Title II
Titlul III privitor la ocrotirea minorului, regarding the minors protection, establishing
stabilind n art. 107 Codul familiei c minorul in art. 107 of Family Code that the minor is
este ntreinut de prinii si. supported by his or her parents.
1.2. Debitorii i creditorii obligaiei 1.2. Debtors and Creditors of the

Debitori ai obligaiei de ntreinere Obligation
sunt prinii, indiferent dac sunt din The debtors of the supporting
cstorie, din afara cstoriei sau din adopie. obligation are the parents, even if they are from
n cazul copilului din cstorie obligaia de the marriage, outside the marriage or from
ntreinere a acestuia revine ambilor prini, adoption. In case of the child from the marriage,
chiar dac sunt desprii n fapt1, iar n cazul his or her supporting obligation belongs to both
celui din afara cstoriei aceasta cade numai of the parents, even if they are actually
n sarcina printelui fa de care copilul i-a separated57, and in case of the one outside the
stabilit filiaia2. n situaia n care copilul este marriage, the obligation belongs only to the
adoptat drepturile i obligaiile printeti trec parent who has established a filiation with the
la adoptator. Acest efect al adopiei rezult din child58. If the child is adopted, the parental
prevederile art. 51 alin. 1 din Legea nr. rights and obligations belong to the adopter.
273/2004 care stabilesc c adoptatorul are fa This effect of the adoption results from the
de copilul adoptat drepturile i ndatoririle stipulations of art. 51, paragraph 1 of Law no.
printelui firesc fa de copilul su. n 273/2004 that establish that the adopter has for
consecin, n cazul adopiei, printele firesc the adopted child the natural parents rights and
nu mai datoreaz ntreinere copilului adoptat, duties for his or her child. As a consequence, in
debitor al ntreinerii fiind adoptatorul. case of adoption, the natural parent does not
Excepie face situaia n care copilul este have to support anymore the adopted child, the
adoptat de ctre soul printelui firesc. ntr-un adopter being the debtor of the support. The
atare caz, art. 51 alin. 2 din lege prevede c exception is represented by the situation when
drepturile i ndatoririle printeti se exercit the child is adopted by the husband of the
de ctre adoptator i de ctre printele firesc, natural parent. In such a case, art. 51, paragraph
ambii avnd, aadar, calitatea de debitori ai 2 of the law stipulates that the parental rights
obligaiei de ntreinere. n cazul n care and duties are exerted by the adopter and by the
adopia nceteaz ca urmare a declarrii natural parent, both of them having thus the
nulitii acesteia, art. 59 alin. 2 din lege arat quality of debtors of the supporting obligation.
c dac instana nu decide instituirea tutelei If the adoption stops as a consequence of
sau a altor msuri de protecie special a declaring its nullity, art. 59, paragraph 2 of the
copilului, n condiiile legii, drepturile i law shows that, if the court does not decide the
ndatoririle printeti sunt redobndite de ctre institution of the guardianship or of other
110
prinii fireti, care redevin debitori ai measures of special protection of the child, in
obligaiei de ntreinere iar adoptatorul nu mai the law conditions, the parental rights and
poate fi obligat s plteasc adoptatului duties are regained by the natural parents who
ntreinere ct timp este minor. become again debtors of the supporting
Printele sau, dup caz, adoptatorul, obligation and the adopter cannot be forced
are calitatea de debitor al obligaiei de anymore to pay for the support of the adopted
ntreinere i n situaia n care a fost deczut child as long as he is minor.
din drepturile printeti (art. 110 Codul The parent or, depending on the case,
familiei prevede c decderea din drepturile the adopter is also the debtor of the supporting
printeti de nu scutete pe printe de obligation if he was declined from his parental
ndatorirea de a ntreine copilul), precum i n rights (art. 110 of Family Code stipulates that
cazul n care a fost pus sub interdicie3. the decline from the parental rights does not
Dei obligaia legal de ntreinere release the parent from the obligation to support
dintre prini i copii are caracter reciproc, n the child), and also if he was put under
majoritatea cazurilor creditor al acestei interdiction59.
obligaii este copilul minor fa de care exist Even if the legal supporting obligation
drepturile i ndatoririle printeti, ntruct between parents and child has a mutual feature,
acesta se afl n imposibilitatea de a realiza in most of the cases, the creditor of this
venituri din munc i nu are, de regul, nici obligation is the minor child for whom there are
alte mijloace materiale pentru a-i asigura cele the parental rights and duties whereas he or she
necesare existenei. n ipoteza n care copilul cannot achieve incomes from work and does
ar avea bunuri nsemnate sau ar realiza not usually have any other material means to
venituri din munc, el ar putea avea i provide the things necessary for the existence.
calitatea de debitor al obligaiei de ntreinere If the child has significant goods or achieves
dac printele su s-ar afla n nevoie din cauza incomes from work, he could also be the debtor
incapacitii de a muncii. of the supporting obligation if his parent is
Copilul minor are dreptul la ntreinere needy because of his inability to work.
indiferent c este din cstorie, din afara The minor child has the right to be
cstoriei sau din adopie. supported even if he is from the marriage,
outside the marriage or from adoption.
1.3. Condiiile de existen ale
obligaiei de ntreinere 1.3. Conditions of Existence of the
Prin excepie de la regula general Supporting Obligation
instituit n art. 86 alin. 2 Codul familiei, aceea By an exception from the general rule
c este ndreptit la ntreinere numai cel aflat instituted in art. 86, paragraph 2 of Family
n stare de nevoie determinat de incapacitatea Code, the only one who has the right to be
de a munci, legiuitorul a stabilit n art. 86 alin. supported is the one in need determined by the
3 Codul familiei c descendentul, ct timp este inability to work, the legislator established in
minor, are drept la ntreinere, oricare ar fi art. 86, paragraph 3 of Family Code that the
pricina nevoii n care se afl. Aadar, n descendant, as long as he is minor, has the right
reglementarea Codului familiei, specific to be supported, whatever is the cause of his
obligaiei de ntreinere a copilului de ctre need. Therefore, in the regulation of the Family
prini sau adoptator este faptul c starea de Code, specific to the childs supporting
nevoie a minorului este determinat de situaia obligation by the parents or by the adopter is the
special n care acesta se gsete, el aflndu-se fact that the minors need status is determined
ntr-o perioad de formare ntruct urmeaz o by his special situation, being in a training
coal i se pregtete pentru o profesie sau period whereas he goes to a certain school and
meserie, situaie care l mpiedic s realizeze he prepares for a profession or a job, a situation
111
venituri din munc chiar dac, potrivit legii, ar that does not let him to achieve incomes from
avea capacitatea de a munci. n raport de work even if, according to the law, he would be
prevederile art. 86 alin. 3 Codul familiei n able to work. Reported to the stipulations of art.
doctrin s-a artat c singura condiie ce trebuie 86, paragraph 3 of Family Code in the doctrine
ndeplinit pentru ca minorul s fie ndreptit it was shown that the only condition that has to
la ntreinere este starea de nevoie care este be accomplished for the minor to have the right
prezumat juris tantum pe toat durata to support is the need status that is juris tantum
minoritii4. Aadar, pn la proba contrar presumed during the entire minority60.
minorul este presupus c se afl n nevoie, spre Therefore, until the contrary evidence, the
deosebire de creditorul major al obligaiei de minor is supposed to be in need, unlike the
ntreinere care, pn la proba contrar, este major creditor of the supporting obligation who,
presupus c nu se afl n nevoie, considerndu- until the contrary evidence, is supposed not to
se c, avnd capacitate de munc, el are be in need, considering that, having the ability
mijloace s se ntrein. to work, he has means to support himself.
Legiuitorul a instituit n art. 107 alin. 2 The legislator instituted in art. 107,
Codul familiei obligaia prinilor de a asigura paragraph 2 of Family Code the parents
condiiile necesare pentru creterea, educarea, obligation to provide the conditions needed in
nvtura i pregtirea sa profesional i n order to raise, educate, teach and professionally
situaia n care minorul ar avea un venit propriu prepare the child and for the situation when the
dar care nu ar fi ndestultor. n practica minor has his own income but this is not
judiciar s-a decis c printele nu poate fi enough. In the judicial practice, it was decided
absolvit de plata unei pensii de ntreinere chiar that the parent cannot be absolved from the
dac coala asigur copilului echipamentul, payment of a supporting alimony even if the
cazarea i hrana pe timpul ct frecventeaz school provides to the child the equipment, the
cursurile ntruct cheltuielile legate de creterea accommodation and the food during the classes
i educarea unui copil sunt mult mai complexe whereas the expenditures related to a childs
i au caracter permanent, astfel nct nu se raise and education are much more complex
poate considera c ele sunt acoperite prin unele and they have a permanent feature so that we
contribuii voluntare sporadice ale printelui5. cannot consider them as being covered by some
Dac minorul nu se afl n nevoie voluntary sporadic contributions of the
61
ntruct realizeaz venituri proprii el nu este parent .
ndreptit s pretind ntreinere de la prinii If the minor is not in need whereas he
si6. n acest sens, n practica judiciar s-a decis achieves his own incomes, he has not the right
c minorul ncadrat, care se poate ntreine din to demand support from his parents62. In this
venitul su din munc, nu se afl n nevoie i sense, in the judicial practice it was decided that
nu are drept la ntreinere n raporturile cu the framed minor who can support oneself from
prinii si7. his income from work is not in need and does
ntruct dispoziiile art. 86 alin. 3 not have any right to be supported by his
Codul familiei prevd c minorul este parents63.
ndreptit la ntreinere oricare ar fi pricina Whereas the stipulations of art. 86,
nevoii n care se afl, s-ar putea considera c i paragraph 3 of Family Code forecast that the
minorul care a mplinit vrsta prevzut de lege minor has the right to be supported, whatever is
pentru a se putea ncadra n munc dar nu o the cause of his need, we may also consider that
face i nici nu urmeaz o form de nvmnt the minor who has reached the age stipulated by
sau de calificare profesional este ndreptit la the law in order to be framed in work, but he
ntreinere din partea prinilor si. n doctrin does not and he does not go to a certain school
s-a exprimat ns opinia c descendentul minor or a type of professional qualification either has
care refuz i s se instruiasc urmnd o form the right to be supported by his parents. But, in
112
de nvmnt, i s munceasc n cazul n care the doctrine, it was expressed the opinion
are vrsta pentru aceasta, sau are chiar o according to which the minor descendant who
comportare antisocial, ca tendine de refuses to be educated by a type of education
vagabondaj etc. ar trebui s piard dreptul la and to work, if he is old enough, or even who
ntreinere din partea prinilor si, cu has an antisocial behaviour, such as vagrancy
posibilitatea de a cere ntreinere n condiiile trends etc. should lose the right to be supported
dreptului comun, urmnd ca dreptul su la by his parents, having the possibility to demand
ntreinere s renasc dac revine i i continu support in the conditions of the common law,
pregtirea colar sau urmeaz o form de and his right to be supported will be born again
calificare8. if he recovers and continues his school training
O problem care a determinat or if he goes to a type of qualification64.
exprimarea mai multor opinii n literatura de A problem that determined the
specialitate a fost aceea de a ti dac prinii au expression of several opinions in the specialty
obligaia de a ntreine minorul n situaia n literature was the one of knowing if the parents
care acesta nu realizeaz venituri dar dispune have the obligation to support the minor if he
de bunuri proprii care ar putea fi vndute does not achieve incomes, but he has his own
pentru a i se asigura ntreinerea. Astfel, unii goods that could be sold in order to provide his
autori9 au susinut c dac minorul nu support. Therefore, some authors65 have
realizeaz venituri el se afl n nevoie chiar i supported that, if the minor does not achieve
n cazul n care ar avea anumite bunuri. n incomes, he is in need even if he as certain
susinerea acestei opinii se arat c, n raport de goods. In supporting this opinion, it is shown
dispoziiile art. 107 alin. 1 i 2 Codul familiei that, reported to the stipulations of art. 107,
care stabilesc c minorul este ntreinut de paragraph 1 and 2 of Family Code that establish
prinii si iar dac acesta nu are venituri that the minor is supported by his parents and if
ndestultoare prinii sunt datori s i asigure they do not have enough incomes, the parents
condiiile necesare pentru creterea, educarea i have to provide him the conditions necessary in
pregtirea sa profesional, nevoia copilului order to raise, educate and professionally train
trebuie apreciat numai n funcie de veniturile him, the childs need must be appreciated only
acestuia nu i de bunurile din patrimoniul su. depending on his incomes, not on the goods of
De asemenea, n argumentarea acestei opinii se his patrimony. Also, by motivating this opinion,
susine c dac s-ar ngdui printelui s vnd we may state that, if the parent is allowed to sell
bunurile copilului n scopul ntreinerii sale ar the childs goods in order to support him, it
nsemna ca, pe de o parte, s i se recunoasc means, on one hand, to acknowledge his
acestuia, n mod indirect, un drept cu privire la indirect right regarding the childs goods, fact
bunurile copilului ceea ce ar contraveni that would contradict the principle of the
principiului independenei patrimoniale dintre patrimonial independence between parent and
printe i copil reglementat de art. 106 Codul child regulated by art. 106 of Family Code, and
familiei, iar pe de alt parte, s-i poat on the other hand, to be able to accomplish his
ndeplini obligaia de cretere a copilului care i obligation to raise the child that belongs to him
revine din ocrotirea printeasc pe seama from the parental protection based on the
bunurilor minorului, ceea ce nu poate fi minors goods, a situation that cannot be
acceptat. ntr-o alt opinie s-a artat c n accepted. In another opinion, it was shown that,
ipoteza n care minorul nu realizeaz venituri if the minor does not achieve incomes, but he
dar are bunuri prin a cror valorificare s-ar has goods by whose capitalization we could
putea procura cele necesare traiului, se vor provide the things necessary for the living, we
folosi pentru ntreinerea sa acele bunuri10. Ca may use those goods in order to support him66.
argument n susinerea acestei opinii se invoc As an argument in supporting this opinion, we
prevederile art. 127 alin. 2 Codul familiei care invoke the stipulations of art. 127, paragraph 2
113
arat c n cazul minorului pus sub tutel of Family Code that shows that, in case of the
cheltuielile necesare pentru ntreinerea minor under guardianship, the expenditures
acestuia i administrarea bunurilor sale se needed in order to support him and to
acoper din veniturile acestuia, prevederi care, administrate his goods are covered by his
potrivit art. 105 alin. 3 Codul familiei au incomes , stipulations that, according to art.
aplicabilitate i n cazul minorului aflat sub 105, paragraph 3 of the Family Code have
ocrotire printeasc. Conform unui alt punct de applicability also for the minor placed under
vedere cruia ne altur, se susine c ambele parental protection. According to another
opinii prezentate anterior dau o rezolvare mult viewpoint, it is stated that both the opinions
prea rigid problemei (n sensul c potrivit previously presented give a very rigid solution
primei opinii vnzarea bunurilor minorului to this problem (meaning that, according to the
pentru asigurarea ntreinerii sale nu este first opinion, selling the minors goods in order
admis iar conform celei de-a doua opinii to provide his support is not admitted and,
ntreinerea minorului urmeaz a fi acoperit according to the second opinion, the minors
din valoarea bunurilor sale i numai dac nu support is to be covered by the value of his
are bunuri va fi ndreptit s pretind goods and only if he has no goods he will have
ntreinere de la prinii si) ignorndu-se faptul the right to be supported by his parents)
c raportarea nevoii copilului minor la ignoring the fact that the report of the minor
mijloacele materiale ale prinilor trebuie s se childs need to the parents material means
fac n aa fel nct s se realizeze un echilibru must be done so that their living standards
ntre nivelul lor de trai. Aadar, instanele would be balanced. Therefore, the judicial
judectoreti urmeaz s fac o analiz elastic courts are to make an elastic analysis of the
a jocului celor dou variabile: nevoia minorului game of the two variables: the minors need and
i mijloacele prinilor astfel nct nivelul de the parents means so that the parents and the
via al prinilor i al copilului s fie childs living standards would be
aproximativ acelai, fiind inechitabil ca approximately the same, being inequitable for
minorul care are un anumit patrimoniu, the minor who has a certain patrimony, maybe
eventual o avere considerabil, s primeasc even a significant fortune, to be supported by
ntreinere de la prinii si care nu ar avea alte his parents who have no other incomes than the
venituri dect cele din munca prestat, dup ones coming from the performed work and it
cum la fel de injust i de neacceptat ar fi s se would be also unfair and unacceptable to
nstrineze de ctre prini bunurile copilului alienate the childs goods from the parents if
dac acestea ar fi nensemnate n raport cu those goods were insignificant in relation to the
mijloacele prinilor11. parents means67.
n cazul n care printele nu realizeaz If the parent does not achieve incomes,
venituri se ridic ntrebarea dac acesta va fi there appears the question whether it is
sau nu exonerat de plata pensiei de ntreinere. exonerated from the payment of the supporting
Codul familiei nu reglementeaz expres aceast alimony. The Family Code does not expressly
problem astfel c rspunsul a fost dat de ctre regulate this problem so that the answer was
practica judiciar care a fcut distincie ntre given by the judicial practice that made a
situaia n care lipsa veniturilor se datoreaz distinction between the situation when the lack
unor motive obiective i cea n care debitorul of incomes occurs due to certain objective
nu realizeaz venituri datorit propriei culpe. n reasons and the one when the debtor does not
primul caz, cnd debitorul obligaiei, dei achieve incomes due to his own guilt. In the
capabil de munc nu realizeaz venituri first case, when the debtor of the obligation,
datorit unor motive obiective cum sunt starea even if he is able to work, does not achieve
de boal sau efectuarea serviciului militar12, incomes due to certain objective reasons such
urmarea unei faculti la cursuri de zi13, as the illness or the accomplishment of the
114
executarea unei pedepse privative de libertate, military service68, going to the daily classes of a
cu excepia situaiei cnd pedeapsa a fost faculty69, executive a freedom privative
aplicat pentru infraciunea de abandon de punishment, except when the punishment was
familie14, acesta urmeaz a fi exonerat de plata applied for the offence of abandoning the
pensiei de ntreinere. n cazul n care printele family70, he is to be exonerated from the
sau adoptatorul debitor al obligaiei de payment of the supporting alimony. If the
ntreinere, dei apt de munc, nu realizeaz parent or the adopter who is the debtor of the
venituri ntruct refuz s munceasc, ori i s-a supporting obligation, even if he is able to
desfcut contractul din munc pentru absene work, does not achieve incomes whereas he
nemotivate, deci prin aplicarea unei sanciuni refuses to work, or his work contract was
din motive ce i sunt imputabile, el nu va fi cancelled because of truancies, so by applying a
exonerat de obligaia legal de ntreinere. n sanction because of certain reasons that cannot
aceste situaii s-a decis c obligarea debitorului be attributed to him, he will not be exonerated
la plata pensiei de ntreinere urmeaz a se from the legal supporting obligation. In these
dispune n raport de venitul minim pe situations, it was decided that the debtors
economia naional15. De asemenea, venitul obligation to pay the supporting alimony is to
minim realizat pe economia naional a fost be disposed reported to the minimum income
avut n vedere de ctre instanele judectoreti on the national economy71. Also, the minimum
i n lipsa altor criterii de stabilire a income on the national economy was
posibilitilor materiale de care dispune considered by the judicial courts and in the
debitorul16 (de exemplu dac la dosar nu exist absence of other criteria of establishing the
probe din care s rezulte c acesta realizeaz debtors material possibilities72 (for example, if
venituri mai mari). Aceast soluie a instanelor there are no evidences in the file to prove the
judectoreti, dei n deplin concordan cu fact that he achieves bigger incomes). This
maxima jurisconsultului francez Loysel qui solution of the judicial courts, even if it totally
fait l`enfant doit le nourrir17, pare s adauge la agrees to the French lawyers maxim qui fait
lege ceea ce nu poate fi acceptat. n cazul n l`enfant doit le nourrir73, seems to add to the
care debitorul, dei apt de munc i avnd law something that cannot be accepted. If the
posibilitatea s munceasc, nu realizeaz debtor, even if he is able to work and he has the
venituri din munc i nu are nici alte surse de possibility to work, does not achieve incomes
venit care s aib caracter de continuitate ori from work and he has no other sources of
bunuri care ar putea fi valorificate pentru a income that could have a continuity feature or
putea presta ntreinerea, ar trebui s se goods that could be capitalized in order to
reglementeze expres c el continu s fie perform the support, we should regulate
obligat la a presta ntreinere copilului, expressly that he continues to be forced to
ntinderea acesteia urmnd s fie stabilit de perform the childs support, its extent being
instana de judecat n funcie de nivelul de trai established by the judicial court depending on
al debitorului i avndu-se n vedere venitul the debtors living standards and considering
minim stabilit pe economia naional. the minimum established income on the
Dac mijloacele materiale ale prinilor national economy.
nu sunt ndestultoare, la ntreinerea minorului If the parents material means are not
pot fi obligai bunicii, att materni ct i enough, both the maternal and paternal
paterni, acetia fiind n subsidiar inui grandparents may be forced to support the
deopotriv s acorde ntreinere nepotului lor18. minor, because they are subsidiarily kept to
Obligaia de ntreinere poate fi pus n sarcina support their grandson74. The supporting
bunicilor numai dac prinii fireti sau obligation may belong to the grandparents only
adoptivi nu dispun de mijloace materiale sau if the natural or adoptive parents do not have
acestea sunt insuficiente din motive material means or if they are not enough
115
independente de voina lor, nu i atunci cnd because of certain reasons that do not depend
prinii, dei capabili de munc, nu realizeaz on their will, not also when the parents, even if
venituri ntruct nu sunt ncadrai n munc19, i they are able to work, do not achieve incomes
numai dac bunicii au posibiliti materiale de whereas they are not framed in work75, and
a o duce la ndeplinire20. only if the grandparents have the material
n cazul n care prinii sau persoanele possibilities for accomplishing this obligation76.
care au, potrivit legii, obligaia de ntreinere a If the parents or the persons who have,
copilului nu pot asigura, din motive according to the law, the obligation to support
independente de voina lor, satisfacerea the child cannot provide, because of certain
nevoilor minime de locuin, hran, reasons that do not depend on their will, the
mbrcminte i educaie ale copilului, art. 45 satisfaction of the childs minimum needs of
alin. 2 din Legea nr. 272/2004 prevede lodgement, food, clothes and education, art. 45,
obligaia statului ca, prin autoritile publice paragraph 2 of Law no. 272/2004 stipulates the
competente, s asigure acestora sprijin state obligation to provide them, by the
corespunztor sub form de prestaii competent public authorities, the corresponding
financiare, prestaii n natur, precum i sub support as financial performances, in kind and
form de servicii, n condiiile legii. Prinii also as services, in the law conditions. The
sunt obligai, conform art. 45 alin. 3 din lege, parents are forced, according to art. 45,
s solicite autoritilor competente acordarea paragraph 3 of the law to demand to the
alocaiilor, indemnizaiilor, prestaiilor n bani competent authorities to grant them alimonies,
sau n natur i a altor faciliti prevzute de allowances, performances in money or in kind
lege pentru copii sau pentru familiile de copii. and other facilities stipulated by the law for
children or for the families with children.
1.4. Obiectul obligaiei de
ntreinere a copilului de ctre prini 1.4. The Object of the Parents
ntreinerea minorului de ctre prinii Obligation to Support the Child
si are un obiect complex presupunnd The minors support accomplished by
acoperirea tuturor cheltuielilor pe care le his parents has a complex object, supposing the
implic realizarea dreptului copilului de a cover of all the expenditures implied by the
beneficia de un nivel de trai care s permit accomplishment of the childs right to benefit
dezvoltarea sa fizic, mental, spiritual, from a living standard that could allow his
moral sau social reglementat de art. 44 alin. physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social
1 din Legea nr. 272/2004. Corelativ acestui development regulated by art. 44, paragraph 1
drept al copilului prinilor (sau, dup caz, of Law no. 272/2004. Correlatively to this
altor reprezentani legali) le revine n primul childs right, the parents (or, depending on the
rnd responsabilitatea prevzut de art. 44 case, the other legal representatives) have in the
alin. 2 din lege, de a asigura, n limita first place the responsibility stipulated by art.
posibilitilor, cele mai bune condiii de via 44, paragraph 2 of the law, to provide, in the
necesare creterii i dezvoltrii copiilor; limit of their possibilities, the best living
prinii sunt obligai s le asigure copiilor conditions needed by the children in order to
locuin, precum i condiiile necesare pentru grow up and to develop; the parents are forced
cretere, educare, nvtur i pregtirea to provide to their children lodgement, and also
profesional. n consecin, obligaia de the conditions needed by the children in order
ntreinere a copilului minor de ctre prinii to grow up, to be educated, taught and
si are ca finalitate asigurarea mijloacelor professionally trained. As a consequence, the
materiale necesare acoperirii cheltuielilor parents obligation to support their minor child
legate de hran, mbrcminte, locuin, has as an ending the providing of the material
ngrijirea sntii, satisfacerea nevoilor social means needed in order to cover the
116
culturale ale copilului precum i a oricror alte expenditures related to food, clothes,
cheltuieli pe care le reclam creterea, lodgement, health care, satisfying the childs
educarea, nvtura i pregtirea profesional social-cultural needs and also any other
a acestuia. expenditures demanded by the childs raise,
education, instruction and professional training.
1.5. Caracterul in solidum al
obligaiei de ntreinere a copilului de ctre 1.5. The in solidum Feature of the
prini Parents Obligation to Support the Child
Obligaia de ntreinere a copilului de The parents obligation to support the
ctre prini este o obligaie in solidum acetia child is an in solidum obligation because they
fiind obligai n comun la ntreinere, fiecare are commonly forced to support him, each one
contribuind proporional cu mijloacele sale21. contributing proportionally to his means77.
Fiecare printe poate fi urmrit pentru ntreaga Each parent can be followed for the entire
ntreinere. Printele care ndeplinete integral support. The parent who accomplishes the
obligaia are aciune n regres mpotriva whole obligation has a regressing action against
celuilalt printe pentru partea ce i revine la the other parent for the part that belongs to him
ntreinere. at the support.
1.6. Data de la care se datoreaz 1.6. The Date since the Support is
ntreinerea Owed
n Codul familiei nu exist prevederi In Family Code, there are no
referitoare la data de la care se datoreaz stipulations referring to the date since the
ntreinerea. n tcerea legii, practica judiciar support is owed. In the law silence, the judicial
a consacrat regula c pensia de ntreinere se practice has consecrated the rule according to
datoreaz de la data nregistrrii cererii de which the supporting alimony is demanded
chemare n judecat, prezumndu-se c dac since the registration of the petition that calls in
nu a cerut ntreinere, creditorul nu s-a aflat n judgement, presuming that, if he did not
nevoie22 pe aceast perioad ntruct dac i-ar demand support, the creditor was not needy78
fi fost necesar nimic nu l mpiedica s during this time whereas if he needed it,
sesizeze de ndat instana judectoreasc. nothing could stop him from announcing
Aceast prezumie poate fi nlturat n cazul immediately the judicial court. This
n care reclamantul va face dovada c presumption may be removed if the plaintiff
ntrzierea introducerii aciunii nu i este proves that the delay of introducing the action
imputabil lui ci debitorului23. Tot practica cannot be attributed to him, but to the debtor79.
judiciar a decis c n cazul n care prinii nu The judicial practice also decided that, if the
sunt divorai iar locuina copilului se parents are not divorced and the childs
stabilete la unul dintre acetia, pensia de lodgement is established at one of them, the
ntreinere urmeaz a se fixa din momentul n supporting alimony is to be established since
care s-a luat aceast msur i nu de la data this measure was taken, not since introducing
introducerii aciunii deoarece pn la acea the action because until that date we suppose
dat este de presupus c ambii prini au that both of the parents have contributed to the
contribuit la ntreinerea copilului24. Dac prin childs support80. If, by the answer given to the
rspunsul dat la interogatoriul luat n instan interrogatory in the court, the defendant agreed
prtul a fost de acord s contribuie la to contribute to the minors support since the
ntreinerea minorului de la data despririi n actual separation of the husbands, the support
fapt a soilor, ntreinerea trebuie acordat de must be granted since this date81.
la aceast dat25. If the marriage is annulled, the
Dac se desface cstoria pensia de supporting alimony will be granted since the
117
ntreinere se va acorda de la data pronunrii date of pronouncing the definitive divorce

hotrrii de divor rmase definitive26 iar nu decision82, not since the date of introducing the
de la data introducerii aciunii de divor cum divorce action, like certain courts have
au decis unele instane27, ntruct, aa cum s-a decided83, whereas, as it was shown in the
artat n literatura juridic, pe durata juridical literature, during the divorce process,
procesului de divor instana de judecat poate the judicial court may take temporary measures,
lua, n temeiul art. 6132 C. pr. civ., msuri based on art. 6132 C. Civil process, by
vremelnice, prin ordonan preedinial i cu presidential ordinance, related to the supporting
privire la obligaia de ntreinere28. obligation84.
n cazul copilului din afara cstoriei, In case of the child outside the
dac pensia de ntreinere a fost cerut odat marriage, if the supporting alimony was
cu aciunea n stabilirea paternitii aceasta demanded at the same time as the action of
trebuie acordat de la data introducerii establishing the paternity, it must be granted
aciunii29. since the date of introducing the action85.
1.7. Executarea obligaiei de 1.7. Execution of the Supporting

ntreinere Obligation
1.7.1. Precizri privind executarea 1.7.1. Specifications regarding the
obligaiei de ntreinere n general Execution of the Supporting Obligation in
n conformitate cu prevederile art. 93 General
alin. 1 Codul familiei obligaia de ntreinere According to the stipulations of art. 93,
se execut n natur sau prin plata unei pensii paragraph 1 of Family Code the supporting
n bani. n alineatul 2 al aceluiai articol obligation is executed in kind or by paying
legiuitorul arat c felul i modalitile de alimony. In paragraph 2 of the same article, the
executare se stabilesc de ctre instana de legislator shows that the way and the means of
judecat, n raport de mprejurri. execution are established by the judicial court,
Executarea n natur a obligaiei de in a circumstances report.
ntreinere se face prin asigurarea celor The execution in kind of the supporting
necesare traiului, inclusiv prin acoperirea obligation is accomplished by providing the
cheltuielilor privind educaia, nvtura i things necessary for living, inclusively by
pregtirea profesional a creditorului minor covering the expenditures related to the minor
iar executarea prin plata unei pensii n bani creditors education, instruction and
presupune prestarea unei sume de bani professional training and the execution by
creditorului la termenele fixate de instana paying alimony supposes the performance of a
judectoreasc. Dei prevederile Codului certain money amount to the creditor at the
familiei se refer expres numai la aceste dou terms established by the judicial court. Even if
modaliti de executare a obligaiei de the stipulations of the Family Code refer
ntreinere n doctrin s-a artat c aceasta expressly only to these two means of executing
poate fi executat parte n natur, parte n the supporting obligation in the doctrine it was
bani30. shown that this may be executed partially in
1.7.2. Executarea voluntar a kind, partially in money86.
ntreinerii 1.7.2. Voluntary Execution of the
n cazul vieii comune a prinilor cu Support
copilul ntreinerea acestuia se nfptuiete In case of the common life of the
voluntar i n cele mai multe situaii se parents and the child, his support is voluntarily
execut n natur. Copilul beneficiaz de accomplished and most of the times it is
ntreinere prin faptul convieuirii cu prinii executed in kind. The child benefits from
si, care, exercitnd ocrotirea printeasc, i support by living with his parents who, by
118
asigur zilnic toate cele necesare existenei exerting the parental protection, provide him
ngrijind de sntatea i dezvoltarea lui fizic, every day the things necessary for his existence,
de educarea, nvtura i pregtirea lui taking care of his health, physical development,
profesional. Prinii se vor putea nvoii cu education, instruction and professional training.
privire la ntreinerea datorat copilului. The parents can make an agreement regarding
Aceast posibilitate a prinilor rezult din the support they owe to the child. This
prevederile art. 107 alin. 3 Codul familiei care possibility of the parents results from the
arat c n caz de nenelegere, ntinderea stipulations of art. 107, paragraph 3 of Family
obligaiei de ntreinere datorat de prini Code that shows that, if there is any
minorului, felul i modalitile executrii disagreement, the extent of the parents
precum i contribuia fiecruia dintre prini supporting obligation for the child, the way and
se vor stabili de ctre instana judectoreasc, the means of the execution and also the
cu ascultarea autoritii tutelare. contribution of each parent will be established
1.7.3. Executarea ntreinerii stabilit by the judicial court, by listening to the
prin hotrre judectoreasc guardian authority.
1.7.3.1. Cazuri n care ntreinerea se 1.7.3. Execution of the Support
stabilete prin hotrre judectoreasc. Dac established by Judicial Decision
n timpul convieuirii fireti a prinilor i 1.7.3.1. Cases when the support is
copilului ntreinerea nu este prestat benevol established by judicial decision. If, during the
sau dac lipsete comunitatea de via dintre parents and the childs natural cohabitation, the
prini i copil ntruct relaiile dintre prini support is not voluntarily performed or if the
sunt compromise, acetia fiind separai n fapt living community between parents and child is
sau divorai, obligaia de ntreinere a absent whereas the relationships between the
copilului mbrac forma unei pensii parents are compromised, because they are
alimentare. Aceeai este situaia i n cazul actually separated or divorced, the childs
declarrii nulitii cstoriei sau stabilirii supporting obligation is similar to alimony. The
filiaiei copilului din afara cstoriei. n toate situation is the same when the marriage is
aceste cazuri n care ntreinerea minorului declared as null or when establishing the
formeaz obiect de litigiu, aceasta se stabilete filiation of the child outside the marriage. In all
de ctre instana judectoreasc. these cases where the minors support
1.7.3.2. Sesizarea instanei. Pn la represents a litigation object, this is established
vrsta de 14 ani copilul i exercit dreptul la by the judicial court.
ntreinere mpotriva unuia dintre prini prin 1.7.3.2. Announcing the court. Until the
cellalt printe, sau mpotriva ambilor prini age of 14, the child exerts his right to be
prin reprezentantul su legal, iar dup supported against a parent by the other one, or
mplinirea acestei vrste dreptul la ntreinere against both of the parents by his legal
se exercit de ctre minorul cu capacitate representative, and after reaching this age, the
restrns de exerciiu cu ncuviinarea right to be supported is exerted by the minor
prealabil a printelui sau reprezentantului with a restraint ability of exertion with the prior
legal. Dac printele n ngrijirea cruia se afl agreement of the parent or of the legal
copilul nu sesizeaz instana de judecat representative. If the parent who is responsible
pentru realizarea dreptului acestuia la for the child does not announce the judicial
ntreinere n practica judiciar s-a decis c court regarding the achievement of his right to
autoritatea tutelar are calitatea procesual de be supported, in the judicial practice it was
a introduce aciunea pentru obligarea celuilalt decided that the guardian authority has the legal
printe la plata pensiei de ntreinere pentru standing quality of introducing the action in
copil31. De asemenea, tot practica judiciar a order to force the other parent to pay the childs
statuat c i procurorul poate exercita o supporting alimony87. Also, the judicial practice
119
asemenea aciune32. stated that the prosecutor may exert such an

Dac se desface cstoria, art. 42 alin. action, too88.
3 Codul familiei prevede c instana If the marriage is annulled, art. 42,
judectoreasc va stabili contribuia fiecrui paragraph 3 of Family Code stipulates that the
printe la cheltuielile de cretere, educare, judicial court will establish each parents
nvtur i pregtire profesional a copiilor. contribution to the expenditures for the
Instana are obligaia de a se pronuna cu childrens raise, education, instruction and
privire la fixarea contribuiei la ntreinere a professional training. The court has to
prinilor chiar dac nu s-a cerut. Prevederile pronounce regarding the establishment of the
art. 42 alin. 3 Codul familiei sunt aplicabile i parents contribution to the support, even if it
n cazul rencredinrii copilului, al declarrii was not required. The stipulations of art. 42,
nulitii cstoriei (art. 24 alin. 2 Codul paragraph 3 of Family Code are applicable also
familiei) i al stabilirii filiaiei copilului din in case of re-entrusting the child, of declaring
afara cstoriei fa de ambii prini (art. 65 the annulment of the marriage (art. 24,
Codul familiei). paragraph 2 of Family Code) and of
1.7.3.3. Instana competent. Aciunea establishing the filiation of the child outside the
pentru obligarea printelui la plata pensiei de marriage in relation to both of the parents (art.
ntreinere se poate soluiona att de ctre 65 of Family Code).
instana de la domiciliul prtului, aplicndu- 1.7.3.3. Competent court. The action for
se regula general stabilit de art. 5 C. pr. civ., forcing the parent to pay the supporting
ct i de ctre instana de la domiciliul alimony may be solved both by the court of the
reclamantului, fiind aplicabile prevederile art. defendants residence, by applying the general
10 pct. 7 C. pr. civ. potrivit crora n cererile rule established by art. 5 Civil Proceedings
fcute de ascendeni sau descendeni pentru Code, and by the court of the plaintiffs
pensie de ntreinere, este competent, n afar residence, by applying the stipulations of art. 10
de instana de la domiciliul prtului, i point 7 of Civil Proceedings Code according to
instana domiciliului reclamantului. Aadar, which in the petitions made by the ascendants
reclamantul are posibilitatea s aleag ntre or the descendants for the supporting alimony,
dou instane deopotriv competente (art. 12 it is competent, beside the court of the
C. pr. civ.). Sub aspect material competena defendants residence, also the court of the
aparine judectoriei (art. 1 pct. 1 C. pr. civ.). plaintiffs residence. Therefore, the plaintiff
n cazul n care pensia de ntreinere se may choose between two courts equally
solicit odat cu desfacerea cstoriei instana competent (art. 12 of Civil Proceedings Code).
competent se determin potrivit art. 607 C. From the material viewpoint, the competence
pr. civ. n temeiul cruia cererea de divor este belongs to the court of justice (art. 1 point 1 of
de competena judectoriei n circumscripia Civil Proceedings Code).
creia se afl cel din urm domiciliu comun al If the supporting alimony is demanded
soilor. Dac soii nu au avut domiciliu comun at the same time with the marriage annulment,
sau dac nici unul dintre soi nu mai locuiete the competent court is determined according to
n circumscripia judectoriei n care se afl art. 607 of Civil Proceedings Code basin on
cel din urm domiciliu comun, judectoria which the divorce petition is framed in the
competent este aceea n circumscripia creia competence of the court of justice in whose
i are domiciliul prtul iar cnd prtul nu circumscription there is the last common
are domiciliul n ar, este competent lodgement of the husbands. If the husbands had
judectoria n circumscripia creia i are no common lodgement or if none of the
domiciliul reclamantul. husbands lives in the circumscription of the
Dac ntreinerea este solicitat n court of justice where there is the last common
procesul de stabilire a paternitii copilului din lodgement, the competent court of justice is the
120
afara cstoriei este competent s se pronune one in whose circumscription there is the
asupra cererii de ntreinere instana care defendants lodgement and when the defendant
soluioneaz aciunea n stabilirea paternitii, does not live in the country, the competent
adic, din punct de vedere material este court of justice is the one in whose
competent judectoria (art. 1 C. pr. civ.) iar din circumscription there is the plaintiffs
punct de vedere teritorial sunt aplicabile regulile lodgement.
nscrise n art. 5 C. pr. civ. fiind competent If the support is required in the process
instana de la domiciliul prtului iar dac of establishing the paternity of the child outside
prtul are domiciliul n strintate sau nu are the marriage, the court competent to pronounce
domiciliu cunoscut este competent instana regarding the supporting demand is the one that
reedinei sale din ar, i dac nici reedina solves the action of establishing the paternity,
acestuia nu este cunoscut, competena aparine namely, from the material viewpoint, the court
instanei domiciliului sau reedinei of justice is competent (art. 1 of Civil
reclamantului. Dispoziiile art. 5 C. pr. civ. sunt Proceedings Code) and from the territorial
aplicabile i n cazul n care se stabilete pensia viewpoint, we may apply the rules registered in
e ntreinere o dat cu desfiinarea cstoriei, art. 5 of Civil Proceedings Code, being
fiind, de asemenea, sub aspect material, competent the court of the defendants
competent judectoria (art. 1 C. pr. civ.). residence and if the defendant lives abroad or if
1.7.3.4. ntinderea obligaiei de his residence is not known, the competent court
ntreinere datorate de prini copiilor minori. is the one of his residence in the country and if
n general, cuantumul ntreinerii se determin his residence is not known either, the
pe baza criteriilor prevzute de art. 94 alin. 1 competence belongs to the court of the
Codul familiei care stabilete regula c plaintiffs residence. The stipulations of art. 5 of
ntreinerea este datorat potrivit cu nevoile Civil Proceedings Code are also applicable if
celui care o cere i cu mijloacele celui care we establish the supporting alimony at the same
urmeaz a o plti. n cazul n care creditor al time with the marriage annulment, the court of
obligaiei de ntreinere este copilul ntinderea justice being also competent, from the material
ntreinerii datorate acestuia de ctre printe viewpoint (art. 1 of Civil Proceedings Code).
sau adoptator se determin de ctre instan 1.7.3.4. The extent of the parents
avndu-se n vedere criteriile stabilite de art. supporting obligation for the minor children.
94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, respectiv pn la o Generally, the supporting quantum is
ptrime din ctigul din munc pentru un determined based on the criteria stipulated by
copil, o treime pentru doi copii i o jumtate art. 94, paragraph 1 of Family Code that
pentru trei sau mai muli copii. Aadar, dac, establishes the rule according to which the
n general, ntinderea ntreinerii se stabilete support is owed according to the needs of the
n funcie de nevoia creditorului i n raport cu one who demands it and to the means of the
mijloacele debitorului, n situaia n care one who is to pay it. If the child is the creditor
printele sau adoptatorul datoreaz ntreinere of the supporting obligation, the extent of the
copilului ntinderea acesteia urmeaz a se support owed him by the parent or by the
determina n funcie de starea de nevoie a adopter is determined by the court, considering
minorului i de posibilitile de plat ale the criteria established by art. 94, paragraph 3 of
debitorului analizate n funcie de ctigul su Family Code, respectively until a quarter of the
din munc, legea instituind anumite plafoane work earnings for a child, a third for two
maxime pn la care se poate stabili pensia de children and a half for three or several children.
ntreinere, innd seama de numrul de copii Therefore, if, in general, the extent of the
ce urmeaz a beneficia de acest drept, support is established depending on the
indiferent dac acetia sunt rezultai din creditors need and in report to the debtors
aceeai cstorie, din cstorii diferite, din means, in the situation when the parent or the
121
adopie33sau din afara cstoriei34. adopter owes support to the child, its extent is to
Cuantumului pensiei de ntreinere be determined depending on the minors need
datorate copilului trebuie orientat spre and on the debtors possibilities to pay that are
maximul plafonului fixat de legiuitor atunci analysed depending on his work earnings, the
cnd debitorul obligaiei de ntreinere nu are law instituting certain maximum limits until
i alte sarcini familiale deosebite35. Astfel, which we may establish the supporting
dac printele sau adoptatorul datoreaz alimony, considering the number of children
ntreinere la trei sau mai muli copii that are to benefit from this right, even if they
cuantumul acesteia poate fi egal cu jumtate come from the same marriage, from different
din ctigul su, ntinderea i durata acesteia marriages, from adoption89or from outside the
urmnd a fi stabilite de ctre instan pentru marriage90.
fiecare copil n parte36. Dac pe lng cei trei The quantum of the supporting alimony
sau mai muli copii debitorul mai are n owed to the child must be directed towards the
ntreinere i un fost so ntinderea pensiei maximum of the limit established by the
datorate fiecrui copil va fi mai mic ntruct, legislator when the debtor of the supporting
potrivit art. 41 alin. 3 ntreinerea datorat obligation has no other special family tasks91.
fostului so poate fi stabilit pn la o treime Thus, if the parent or the adopter has to support
din venitul net din munc al celui obligat la three or more children, the supporting quantum
plata ei i mpreun cu ntreinerea datorat may be equal to half of his earnings, and its
copiilor nu poate depi jumtate din venitul extent and time are to be established by the
net din munc al debitorului. court for each child separately92. If, beside the
n reglementare din Codul familiei three or several children, the debtor also has to
legiuitorul a fixat un plafon maxim din support an ex-husband, the extent of the
ctigul din munc datorat ca pensie de alimony owed to each child will be smaller
ntreinere copilului fr a preciza ce se whereas, according to art. 41, paragraph 3 the
nelege printr-un asemenea ctig. n tcerea support owed to the ex-husband may be
legii instanele judectoreti au decis c established until a third of the work net income
ntinderea ntreinerii trebuie stabilit innd of the one who is forced to pay it and together
cont de toate veniturile debitorului care au with the support owed to the children, it cannot
caracter de continuitate, adic att retribuia cross half of the debtors work net income.
propriu-zis ct i sporul de vechime, In the regulation of the Family Code,
indemnizaia de conducere sau alt venit the legislator established a maximum limit of
permanent nu i de cele care au caracter the work earnings owed as a supporting
ntmpltor37 cele pentru ore suplimentare, alimony without specifying what we
indemnizaiile de deplasare, de transferare, de understand by such earnings. In the law silence,
concediere i n general sumele care nu au the judicial courts have decided that the extent
caracter permanent cum sunt i salariile of the support must be established by
compensatorii n cazul disponibilizrii considering all the incomes of the debtor that
debitorului pensiei38. De asemenea, instanele have a continuity feature, namely both the
au artat c sporul cuvenit angajailor care proper retribution and the seniority rise, the
lucreaz n condiii deosebite de munc nu se leading allowance or any other permanent
ia n considerare la calculul pensiei de income, but not the ones having an accidental
ntreinere39. feature93 the ones for the overtime, the
ntruct dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 3 displacement allowances, the transferring ones,
Codul familiei se refer expres la ctigul din the firing ones and generally the amounts that
munc al printelui sau adoptatorului se pune do not have a permanent feature, such as the
problema dac mijloacele materiale n funcie compensatory wages if the debtor of the
de care se determin ntinderea obligaiei de alimony is fired94. Also, the courts have shown
122
ntreinere a copilului sunt limitate numai la that the rise belonging to the employees
venitul din munc al debitorului sau urmeaz working in special work conditions is not
a se aplica i n cazul ntreinerii minorului considered when calculating the supporting
principiul general reglementat de art. 94 alin. alimony95.
1 Codul familiei astfel nct, n funcie de Whereas the stipulations of art. 94,
mijloacele debitorului ntreinerii, cuantumul paragraph 3 of Family Code refer expressly to
ntreinerii s poate trece peste limitele the parent or adopters work earnings, we may
prevzute de art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei. ask if the material means depending on which
ntr-o opinie s-a artat c i n cazul we determine the extent of the childs
obligaiei de ntreinere a prinilor fa de supporting obligation are limited only to the
copiii lor minori cuantumul ntreinerii se debtors work income or are to be applied also
stabilete n raport cu totalitatea mijloacelor in case of supporting the minor, the general
patrimoniale ale printelui respectiv iar dac principle regulated by art. 94, paragraph 1 of
acesta nu are alte venituri, dect ctigul din Family Code so that, depending on the means
munc, plafonul maxim este acela artat de of the supporting debtor, the supporting
art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei40. quantum may cross the limits stipulated by art.
ntr-o alt opinie se consider c din 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code.
punct de vedere juridic este imposibil In a certain opinion, it was shown that
aplicarea n aceeai ipotez att a also in case of the parents supporting
reglementrilor speciale (art. 94 alin. 3 Codul obligation for their minor children, the
familiei) ct i a reglementrilor generale (art. supporting quantum is established in report to
94 alin. 1 Codul familiei), reglementrile the totality of the respective parents
generale fiind folosite doar pentru a complini patrimonial means and if he has no incomes
aspectele lacunare ale reglementrilor speciale than the work earnings, the maximum limit is
i nu pentru a le nltura sau a le dubla, the one shown by art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family
deoarece generalia lex specialibus non Code96.
derogat i specialia generalibus derogant. Se In another opinion, it is considered that,
susine n aceeai opinie c termenul from the juridical viewpoint, it is impossible to
ctiguri este folosit de legiuitor n art. 94 apply in the same hypothesis both the special
alin. 3 Codul familiei n sensul de venituri regulations (art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code)
obinute din alte surse dect cele din munc and the general regulations (art. 94, paragraph 1
iar termenul munc n sensul de venituri din of Family Code), the general regulations being
munc, considerndu-se c, fa de folosirea used only in order to complement the incomplete
alternativa celor doi termeni n acest text de aspects of the special regulations and not to
lege, n ipoteza n care printele realizeaz remove or double them, because generalia lex
venituri din ambele categorii, pensia de specialibus non derogat and specialia
ntreinere va fi calculat numai n raport cu generalibus derogant. The same opinion states
unul dintre cele dou elemente, fiind exclus that the earnings term is used by the legislator
cumularea lor. Cu alte cuvinte, spre deosebire in art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code meaning
de dreptul comun, pentru stabilirea acestei incomes obtained from other sources than the
obligaii nu vor fi folosite toate mijloacele work ones and the work term meaning work
materiale ale debitorului, ci numai un element incomes, considering that, comparing to the
al acestora, adic fie numai veniturile din alternative use of the two terms in this law text, if
munc, fie numai veniturile din alte surse. De the parent achieves both of the types of incomes,
asemenea, se mai arat c, atta vreme ct the supporting alimony will be calculated only
obligaia de ntreinere ar fi raportat exclusiv reported to one of the two elements, excluding
la veniturile din munc, lipsa acestora ar their accrual. In other words, unlike the common
face ca printele s fie considerat c nu law, in order to establish this obligation we will
123
dispune de mijloacele necesare pentru not use all the debtors material means, but only
obligarea la ntreinerea copilului, astfel c an element of theirs, namely either only the work
dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, incomes, or only the incomes from other
anihileaz, n acest caz, dreptul copilului de a sources. Also, it is shown that, as long as the
fi ntreinut, fiind contrare principiului nscris supporting obligation is reported exclusively to
n art. 49 alin. 1 din Constituia Romniei the work incomes, their absence makes the
republicat, conform cruia copiii i tinerii se parent to be considered as he does not have the
bucur de un regim special de protecie n means needed in order to be forced to support
realizarea drepturilor lor, motiv pentru care se the child, so that the stipulations of art. 94,
sugereaz ca, de lege ferenda, legiuitorul s paragraph 3 of Family Code annihilates in this
abroge prevederile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul case the childs right to be supported, being
familiei i s supun obligaia de ntreinere a contrary to the principle registered in art. 49,
copilului de ctre printe principiului stipulat paragraph 1 in the republished Romanian
de art. 94 alin.1 Codul familiei41. Constitution according to which the children and
Asupra problemei n discuie s-a the young people enjoy a special protection
pronunat i Curtea Constituional atunci system in accomplishing their rights, reason for
cnd a respins, n dou rnduri, excepia de which it is suggested, de lege ferenda, for the
neconstituionalitate a dispoziiilor art. 94 alin. legislator to abrogate the stipulations of art. 94,
3 Codul familiei invocat n raport de art. 49 paragraph 3 of Family Code and to submit toe
alin. 1 din Constituie, artnd, ntre altele, c parents obligation to support the child to the
art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei nu instituie nicio principle stipulated by art. 94, paragraph 1 of
interdicie formal n ceea ce privete Family Code97.
raportarea pensiei de ntreinere i la alte Regarding the discussed problem, the
venituri dect cele din munc. Dimpotriv, Constitutional Court pronounced when it
stabilirea pensiei de ntreinere se poate face n rejected twice the non-constitutionality
funcie de orice venituri ale debitorului n exception of the stipulations of art. 94,
temeiul prevederilor art. 94 alin. 1 i 2 Codul paragraph 3 of Family Code invoked in report
familiei potrivit crora ntreinerea este to art. 49, paragraph 1 of the Constitution,
datorat potrivit cu nevoia celui care o cere i showing, among other things, that art. 94,
cu mijloacele celui ce urmeaz a o plti iar paragraph 3 of Family Code institutes no
instana judectoreasc va putea mri sau formal interdiction related to the report of the
micora obligaia de ntreinere sau hotr supporting alimonies to other incomes than the
ncetarea ei, dup cum se schimb mijloacele work ones. On the contrary, the establishment
celui care d ntreinerea sau nevoia celui care of the supporting alimony can be made
o primete. n cazul n care debitorul depending on any incomes of the debtor based
obligaiei realizeaz i alte categorii de on the stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 1 and 2
venituri, nu vor opera limitele instituite prin of Family Code according to which the
alin. 3 al art. 94 Codul familiei care i vor support is owed proportionally to the need of
gsi aplicare exclusiv n cazul n care pensia the one who demands it and to the means of the
de ntreinere este stabilit prin raportare one who will pay it and the judicial court will
numai la ctigul din munc al acestuia, be able to increase or decrease the supporting
instana fiind suveran n a determina obligation or to decide its cessation, depending
cuantumul acesteia n funcie de situaia de on the change of the means of the one who
fapt42. gives the support or the need of the one who
n ceea ce ne privete considerm c receives it. If the debtor of the obligation
dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei se accomplishes other income categories, the
refer la veniturile pe care debitorul le limits instituted by paragraph 3 of art. 94 of
realizeaz exclusiv din munca sa, nu i la Family Code will not operate, limits that will be
124
veniturile provenite din alte surse, ntruct applied exclusively if the supporting alimony is
dac ar fi avut n vedere i alte posibiliti established by reporting only to his work
materiale ale acestuia n afara ctigului din earnings, the court being sovereign in
munc legiuitorul ar fi prevzut aceasta n determining its quantum depending on the
mod expres folosind formularea mijloacele actual situation98.
celui ce urmeaz a o plti pe care o utilizeaz Regarding us, we consider that the
atunci cnd stabilete n art. 94 alin. 1 Codul stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family
familiei regula general n funcie de care se Code refer to the incomes the debtor achieves
determin ntinderea ntreinerii. Faptul c exclusively by his work, not to the incomes
legiuitorul a avut n vedere exclusiv coming from other sources whereas if he
ctigurile pe care printele sau adoptatorul le considered other material possibilities of his
obine fiind ncadrat n munc rezult i din beside the work earnings, the legislators would
prevederile art. 41 alin. 3 teza final Codul expressly stipulate this by using the wording
familiei care arat c ntreinerea datorat the means of the one who will pay it that he
fostului so mpreun cu ntreinerea datorat only uses when establishing in art. 94,
copiilor nu va putea depi jumtate din paragraph 1 of Family Code the general rule
venitul net din munc al celui obligat la plata. depending on which it is determined the
Aceasta nu nseamn ns c ntinderea supporting extent. The fact that the legislator
ntreinerii trebuie determinat numai n raport considered exclusively the earnings the parent
de venitul din munc al debitorului obligaiei, or the adopter obtains by being framed in work
ci instana trebuie s stabileasc pensia de also results from the stipulations of art. 41,
ntreinere n raport de nevoile reale ale paragraph 3 of the final thesis of Family Code
copilului pe care trebuie s le coreleze cu that shows that the support owed to the ex-
mijloacele prinilor, innd seama, dac husband together with the support owed to the
nevoile minorului impun aceasta i de alte children will not be able to cross half of the
surse de venit ale printelui sau adoptatorului work net income of the one forced to pay. This
obligat la ntreinere. does not mean that the supporting extent must
1.7.3.5. Modificarea ntinderii be determined only in report to the work
ntreinerii. Hotrrea judectoreasc avnd ca income of the debtor of the obligation, but the
obiect stabilirea pensiei de ntreinere este court must establish the supporting alimony in
exceptat de la principiul autoritii de lucru report to the childs real needs that he has to
judecat. ntinderea ntreinerii datorate de correlate to the parents means, considering if
prini copilului va putea fi mrit sau the minors needs impose that and also
micorat, conform art. 94 alin. 2 Codul considering other income sources of the parent
familiei, dac se schimb mijloacele celui care or of the adopter forced to support.
d ntreinerea sau nevoia celui care o 1.7.3.5. Changing the supporting
primete. Pentru modificarea cuantumului extent. The judicial decision having as an object
ntreinerii nu este necesar s se schimbe att the establishment of the supporting alimony is
mijloacele debitorului ct i nevoia excerpted from the authority principle of a
creditorului, fiind suficient s intervin judged object. The extent of the support owed
modificri n ceea ce privete unul dintre cele to the child by the parents will be able to be
dou elemente n funcie de care ntreinerea increased or decreased, according to art. 94,
se stabilete43. n practica judiciar s-a decis paragraph 2 of Family Code, if the means of the
c naterea unui nou copil constituie o one who gives the support or the need of the
mprejurare de natur a influena asupra one who receives it changes. In order to change
mijloacelor de trai ale celui care d ntreinere the supporting quantum, it is not necessary to
avnd drept consecin modificarea plafonului change both the debtors means and the
pensiei de ntreinere44. De asemenea, n creditors need, being enough to interfere
125
practic s-a stabilit c este ntemeiat cererea changes regarding one of the two elements
de majorare a cuantumului pensiei de depending on which the support is
ntreinere formulat de copil prin established99. In the judicial practice, it was
reprezentantul su legal, atunci cnd situaia decided that the birth of a new child consists a
material a debitorului s-a schimbat circumstance able to have influence on the
considerabil urmare a primirii unei importante living standards of the one who gives support,
sume de bani ca despgubire pentru un having as a consequence the change of the
accident de circulaie suferit de acesta45. Nu supporting alimony limit100. Also, in the
mprtim acest punct de vedere ntruct practice it was established that it is
sumele de bani ncasate cu titlu de accomplished the demand of increasing the
indemnizaie de asigurare sau despgubire quantum of the supporting alimony formulated
pentru pagubele pricinuite persoanei sunt by the child by means of his legal representative
destinate s repare pagube exclusiv personale, when the debtors material situation is changed
s refac, dac mai este posibil, capacitatea de significantly as a consequence of receiving an
munc, sau s asigure existena persoanei care important money amount as a compensation for
nu mai este capabil de a muncii, astfel c nu a traffic accident suffered by him101. We do not
pot fi folosite pentru ntreinerea altei share this viewpoint whereas the money
persoane. Creditorul va putea cere majorarea amounts cashed as supporting or compensating
cuantumului ntreinerii dac nevoile acestuia allowances for the damage caused to the person
au crescut, chiar dac la data stabilirii pensiei are meant to repair exclusively personal
aceasta era ndestultoare. Majorarea damage, to recover, if it is possible, the work
cuantumului pensiei de ntreinere are loc de ability or to provide the existence of the person
la data introducerii cererii, excepie fcnd who is not able to work anymore, so that they
situaia cnd ntrzierea introducerii cererii se cannot be used in order to support another
datoreaz culpei debitorului iar reducerea person. The creditor will be able to ask for the
acesteia are loc de la data ivirii cauzei care a increase of the supporting quantum if his needs
justificat admiterea aciunii46. increase, even if when establishing the alimony,
it was enough. The increase of the supporting
1.8. ncetarea obligaiei de allowance quantum occurs since the date of
ntreinere introducing the demand, except for the situation
Obligaia de ntreinere acordat when the delay of introducing the demand is
minorului de ctre printe nceteaz prin because the debtors guilt and its reduction
ajungerea acestuia la majorat, iar nainte de occurs since the date of appearing the cause that
mplinirea vrstei majoratului prin cstoria justified the admission of the action102.
minorului n condiiile legii. Dup mplinirea
vrstei majoratului copilul mai poate pretinde 1.8. Cessation of the Supporting
ntreinere doar dac i continu studiile47. Obligation
Dreptul la ntreinere al copilului major care The parents obligation to support the
i continu studiile ntr-o form de minor stops when he reaches his full age and
nvmnt organizat potrivit legii nu este before reaching the full age by the minors
reglementat de ctre Codul familiei. n tcerea marriage in the law conditions. After reaching
legii, Plenul fostului Tribunal Suprem a the full age, the child can ask for support only if
statuat, prin decizie de ndrumare, c printele he continues his studies103. The right to be
este obligat s dea ntreinere copilului devenit supported of the major child who continues his
major, dac se afl n continuare de studii, studies in an education institution organized
pn la terminarea acestora, fr a depi according to the law is not regulated by the
vrsta de 25 de ani48. Dac datorit studiilor Family Code. In the law silence, the Plenum of
pe care le frecventeaz copilul are posibilitatea the ex Supreme Court stated, by a guiding
126
s obin venituri, acesta nu este ndreptit la decision, that the parent was forced to support
ntreinere. ntr-o atare situaie se afl majorul the major child if he continues his studies, until
care urmeaz cursurile la forma de nvmnt he finishes them, without crossing the age of
fr frecven i care nu este obligat s mearg 25104. If, because of the studies he attends, the
n fiecare zi la facultate49. child has the possibility to obtain incomes, he
Copilul devenit major i aflat n has no right to be supported. In such a situation
continuare de studii trebuie s cear, printr-o is placed the major child who goes to the classes
nou aciune, obligarea printelui la plata of an extramural educational institution and who
pensiei de ntreinere, ntruct hotrrea prin is not forced to go to classes every day105.
care printele a fost obligat la ntreinerea The major child who continues his
copilului minor i nceteaz efectele n mod studies must ask, by a new action, his parent to
automat la mplinirea de ctre acesta a vrstei de pay his supporting alimony whereas the decision
18 ani50. by means of which the parent was forced to
n temeiul art. 94 alin. 2 Codul familiei, support his minor child automatically stops its
instana judectoreasc poate decide ncetarea effects when he reaches the age of 18106.
plii ntreinerii dac dispare nevoia creditorului Based on art. 94, paragraph 2 of Family
obligaiei de ntreinere sau dac debitorul nu Code, the judicial court may decide the cessation
mai are mijloacele necesare pentru plata ei. n of the supporting payment if the creditors need
practica judiciar s-a decis c poate fi sistat to be supported disappears or if the debtor has no
plata pensiei de ntreinere dac minorul s-a means needed in order to pay it anymore. In the
ncadrat n munc realiznd venituri proprii din judicial practice, it was decided that we could
care se poate ntreine51. De asemenea, cease the payment of the supporting alimony if
instanele au hotrt sistarea plii pensiei de the minor was framed in work and he
ntreinere n cazul n care debitorul a devenit accomplished his own incomes by means of
incapabil de munc astfel c nu mai realizeaz which he could support himself107. Also, the
venituri nici pentru propria ntreinere sau se afl courts have decided to cease the payment of the
la studii ori n curs de satisfacere a stagiului supporting alimony if the debtor has become
militar sau de executare a unei pedepse privative unable to work so that he could not accomplish
de libertate, afar de cazul n care a fost incomes for his own support either or if he
condamnat pentru infraciunea de abandon de studied or if he satisfied his military stage or if he
familie52. executed a freedom privative punishment, beside
Obligaia de a ntreine copilul mai poate the case when he was convicted for the offence
nceta, atunci cnd debitor al acesteia este tatl, of abandoning the family108.
dac acesta tgduiete cu succes paternitatea The obligation to support the child may
copilului. ntruct admiterea aciunii n tgada also stop when its debtor is the father, if he
paternitii produce efecte retroactive din successfully denies the childs paternity.
momentul naterii copilului n literatura juridic Whereas the admission of the action when
s-a ridicat ntrebarea dac pensia de ntreinere denying the paternity produces retroactive
prestat anterior tgduirii paternitii de ctre effects since the child is born, the juridical
soul sau fostul so al mamei este sau nu supus literature raised the question whether the
restituirii, conturndu-se dou opinii. ntr-o supporting alimony performed before the
opinie, pe care o acceptm, se arat c pensia de mothers husband or ex-husband denied is
ntreinere prestat anterior tgduirii paternitii submitted to the restitution, outlining two
este supus restituirii invocndu-se ca temei opinions. In an opinion accepted by us it is
juridic plata nedatorat, dac restituirea se cere shown that the supporting alimony performed
de la copil sau mbogirea fr just cauz dac before denying the paternity is submitted to the
se cere de la mama copilului ori de la cel care restitution, invoking as a juridical basis the non-
avea obligaia de ntreinere53. A doua opinie owed payment, if the restitution is demanded
127
susine c pensia de ntreinere prestat nu este from the child or the enrichment with no fair
supus restituirii ntruct este vorba despre o cause if it is demanded from the childs mother
obligaie cu prestare succesiv iar pn la or from the one who had the supporting
nlturarea prezumiei de paternitate soul obligation109. The second opinion states that the
mamei are obligaia legal de ntreinere54. performed supporting alimony is not submitted
to the restitution whereas it is about an obligation
II. Obligaia de ntreinere dintre with successive performance and until removing
prini i copil n sistemul noului Cod civil the paternity presumption, the mothers husband
has the legal supporting obligation110.
2.1. Reglementare
La fel ca i n reglementarea din Codul II. The Supporting Obligation
familiei legiuitorul se refer n noul Cod civil la between Parents and Child in the System of
obligaia prinilor de a ntreine copilul att n the New Civil Code
Titlul V Obligaia de ntreinere artnd n art.
516 care reglementeaz subiectele obligaiei de 2.1. Regulation
ntreinere c aceasta exist i ntre rudele n Like in the regulation of the Family
linie dreapt inclusiv cele rezultate din adopie Code, the legislator refers in the new Civil Code
(art. 516 alin. 1 i 2 din noul Cod civil) ct i n to the parents obligation to support the child
capitolul dedicat ocrotirii printeti, mai exact n both in Title V The Supporting Obligation,
art. 499 din noul Cod civil, stabilind n alineatul showing in art. 516 that regulates the subjects of
1 al acestui articol c tatl i mama sunt obligai, the supporting obligation that it exists also
n solidar, s dea ntreinere copilului lor minor, between the straight line relatives, including the
asigurndu-i cele necesare traiului, precum i ones resulted from adoption (art. 516, paragraph
educaia, nvtura i pregtirea sa profesional. 1 and 2 of the new Civil Code) and in the chapter
dedicated to the parental protection, more
2.2. Condiii de existen specifically in art. 499 of the new Civil Code,
Prevederile noului Cod civil consacr establishing in the first paragraph of this article
regula c are drept la ntreinere cel care se afl that the father and the mother are solidarily
n nevoie, neputndu-se ntreine din munca sa forced to support their minor child, providing the
ori din bunurile sale (art. 524). Condiia strii de things necessary for his living, and also for his
nevoie este reglementat i n ceea ce l privete education, instruction and professional training.
pe minor pentru ca acesta s poat cere
ntreinere de la prinii si, numai c art. 525 2.2. Living Conditions
alin. 1 din noul Cod civil arat c minorul se afl The stipulations of the new Civil Code
n nevoie dac nu se poate ntreine din munca consecrate the rule according to which the one
sa chiar dac ar avea bunuri. Aceast prevedere who has the right to be supported is the one in
din art. 525 alin. 1 din noul Cod civil reprezint need, being unable to support himself from his
un element de noutate n raport de dispoziiile work or from his goods (art. 524). The condition
Codului familiei avnd menirea de a pune capt of the needy status is also regulated regarding the
disputelor doctrinare n legtur cu posibilitatea minor so that he could ask their parents for
vnzrii bunurilor minorilor cu scopul asigurrii support, but art. 525, paragraph 1 of the new
ntreinerii acestuia. Numai n cazul n care Civil Code shows that the minor is in need if he
prinii n-ar putea presta ntreinerea fr a-i is not able to support himself from his work,
primejdui propria lor existen, instana de tutel even if he has goods. This stipulation of art. 525,
poate ncuviina ca ntreinerea s se asigure prin paragraph 1 of the new Civil Code represents a
valorificarea bunurilor pe care acesta le are, cu new element reported to the possibility of selling
excepia celor de strict necesitate (525 alin. 2 the minors goods in order to provide his
din noul Cod civil). support. Only if the parents are not able to
128
Starea de nevoie a minorului poate fi support him without endangering their own
dovedit prin orice mijloc de prob (art. 528 din existence, the guardian court may allow the
noul Cod civil ). support to be provided by the capitalization of
Le fel ca i prevederile Codului familiei his goods, except for the strictly necessary ones
(art. 107 alin. 2), dispoziiile noului Cod civil (525, paragraph 2 of the new Civil Code).
reglementeaz obligaia prinilor de a-i asigura The minors needy status may be proved
copilului condiiile necesare pentru creterea, by any evidence means (art. 528 of the new Civil
educarea i pregtirea sa profesional chiar i n Code).
situaia n care acesta ar avea un venit propriu, Like the stipulations of the Family Code
dar care nu este ndestultor. (art. 107, paragraph 2), the stipulations of the
Ca noutate, legiuitorul reglementeaz n new Civil Code regulate the parents obligation
noul Cod civil alturi de condiia strii de nevoie to provide to the child the conditions needed in
i pe aceea ca persoana care solicit pensia de order to raise, educate and professionally train
ntreinere s fi avut un comportament him, even if he has his own income that is not
corespunztor regulilor de convieuire social enough.
fa de debitor pentru a putea pretinde ntreinere As a new element, the legislator also
de la acesta. n acest sens art. 526 alin. 1 din regulates in the new Civil Code, next to the
noul Cod civil prevede c nu poate pretinde condition of the needy status, the one when the
ntreinere acela care s-a fcut vinovat fa de cel person that demands the supporting alimony to
obligat la ntreinere de fapte grave, contrare had had behaviour according to the rules of
legii sau bunelor moravuri. ntruct prevederile social cohabitation in relation to the debtor in
textului citat nu fac nicio distincie ele urmeaz order to be able to ask for his support. In this
a se aplica i creditorului minor care cere sense art. 526, paragraph 1 of the new Civil
ntreinere de la prinii si. Legiuitorul nu arat Code stipulates that the one who cannot demand
nici mcar cu titlu de exemplu care sunt faptele to be supported is the one who is guilty in front
de natur s-l decad pe creditor din dreptul la of the one who was forced to support by serious
ntreinere, limitndu-se doar s instituie actions against the law or against the good
condiia ca acestea s fie grave, contrare legii i manners. Whereas the stipulations of the quoted
bunelor moravuri. Rmne aadar ca instana de text make no difference, they are to be applied
tutel s decid dac, n raport de natura faptelor also to the minor creditor that asks his parents to
de care se face vinovat, creditorul obligaiei de support him. The legislator does not show, not
ntreinere pierde sau nu dreptul la ntreinere. n even as examples, the facts able to decline the
ceea ce ne privete considerm c acesta poate creditor from his right to be supported, being
pierde dreptul la ntreinere n cazul comiterii limited at instituting the condition according to
fa de debitor a unor fapte de natur s atrag which they have to be serious, against the law
nedemnitatea succesoral55 precum tentativa de and the good manners. Thus, the guardian court
omor sau alte fapte grave de violen fizic sau will decide whether, in relation to the nature of
moral svrite cu intenie, precum i n cazul the facts that make him guilty, the creditor of the
comiterii unor fapte care, potrivit prevederilor supporting obligation loses the right to be
noului Cod Civil justific desfacerea adopiei, supported. Regarding us, we consider that he
respectiv a unor fapte penale pedepsite cu o may lose the right to be supported if he
pedeaps privativ de libertate de cel puin 2 ani accomplishes in front of the debtor certain facts
(art. 477 alin. 1). able to attract the successional indignity111 and
Spre deosebire de Codul familiei, noul also the murder attempt or other serious facts of
Cod civil conine prevederi care stabilesc c physical or moral violence deliberately
poate fi obligat la ntreinere numai cel care are accomplished and also in case of committing
mijloacele pentru a o plti sau are posibilitatea certain facts that, according to the stipulations of
de a dobndi aceste mijloace (art. 527 alin. 1). the new Civil Code, justify the annulment of the
129
La stabilirea mijloacelor debitorului se ine adoption, respectively of certain criminal facts

seama de veniturile i bunurile acestuia, precum punished by a freedom privative punishment of
i de posibilitile de realizare a acestora (art. at least 2 years (art. 477, paragraph 1).
527 alin. 2). De asemenea, ntruct legiuitorul se Unlike the Family Code, the new Civil
refer i la posibilitatea de realizare a Code contains stipulations stating that the one
mijloacelor necesare prestrii ntreinerii, va that can be forced to support is only the one who
putea fi obligat la plata acesteia i debitorul care, has the means to pay it or the possibility to
dei apt de munc i avnd posibilitatea s achieve these means (art. 527, paragraph 1).
munceasc, nu realizeaz venituri din munc i When establishing the debtors means, we also
nu are nici alte surse de venit care s aib consider his incomes and goods and the
caracter de continuitate, ori bunuri care s poat possibilities to achieve them (art. 527, paragraph
fi valorificate pentru a presta ntreinere. ntr-o 2). Also, whereas the legislator refers to the
astfel de situaie ar trebui s se prevad c possibility to accomplish the means needed in
ntinderea ntreinerii va fi stabilit de instan n order to perform the support, he will be forced to
raport de nivelul de trai al debitorului i avnd n pay it and the debtor who, even if he is able to
vedere venitul minim stabilit pe economia work and he has possibility to work, does not
naional56. achieve work incomes and has no other income
sources having a continuous feature, or goods
2.3. Cuantumul ntreinerii that could be capitalized in order to perform
Similar reglementrii din Codul familiei support. In such a situation, we should stipulate
n sistemul noului Cod Civil cuantumul that the support extent will be established by the
ntreinerii se determin, n general, n funcie de court in report to the debtors living standards
nevoia celui care o cere i de mijloacele celui and considering the minimum established
care urmeaz a o plti (art. 529 alin. 1). Atunci income on the national economy112.
cnd ntreinerea este datorat de printe,
ntinderea acesteia se determin n funcie de 2.3. The Support Quantum
criteriile reglementate de art. 529 alin. 2 din noul Like the regulation of the Family Code
Cod civil, respectiv pn la o ptrime din venitul in the system of the new Civil Code, the support
su lunar net pentru un copil, o treime pentru doi quantum is generally determined depending on
copii i o jumtate pentru trei sau mai muli the need of the one who asks for it and on the
copii. Se observ c legiuitorul nu se mai refer means of the one who will pay it (art. 529,
expres la ctigul din munc al printelui ci la paragraph 1). When the support is owed by the
venitul su lunar net, astfel c la stabilirea parent, its extent is determined depending on the
ntinderii ntreinerii se vor avea n vedere att criteria regulated by art. 529, paragraph 2 of the
venitul din munc al debitorului ct i celelalte new Civil Code, respectively to a quarter of his
venituri cu caracter permanent pe care acesta le monthly net income for one child, a third for two
realizeaz lunar. children and a half for three or several children.
i n reglementarea din noul Cod civil We may notice that the legislator does not refer
dispoziiile art. 499 alin. 4 las prinilor expressly to the parents work income anymore,
posibilitatea de a se nelege n privina ntinderii but to his monthly net income, so that, when
ntreinerii pe care sunt datori s o presteze establishing the support extent, we will consider
copilului iar n caz de nenelegere prevederile both the debtors work income and the other
aceluiai articol arat c ntinderea ntreinerii, incomes having a permanent feature that his
precum i contribuia fiecrui printe la accomplishes per month.
ntreinerea acestuia, felul i modalitile de Also in the regulation of the new Civil
executare se stabilesc de ctre instana tutelar Code, the stipulations of art. 499, paragraph 4
pe baza raportului de anchet psihosocial. leaves to the parents the possibility to make an
Cuantumul ntreinerii datorate copiilor, agreement regarding the support extent that they
130
mpreun cu ntreinerea datorat altor persoane, owe to the child and, if they cannot make this
potrivit legii, nu poate depi jumtate din agreement, the stipulations of the same article
venitul net lunar al celui obligat (art. 529 alin. 3 show that the support extent and also each
din noul Cod civil). parents contribution to his support, the way and
the means of execution are established by the
2.4. Data de la care se datoreaz guardian court based on the report of the psycho-
ntreinerea social investigation.
Spre deosebire de Codul familiei care nu The quantum of the support owed to the
conine prevederi referitoare la data de la care se children, together with the support owed to other
datoreaz ntreinerea, n noul Cod civil data de persons, according to the law, cannot cross half
la care se datoreaz ntreinerea este of the monthly net income of the person who is
reglementat expres de dispoziiile art. 532 care forced to pay (art. 529, paragraph 3 of the new
arat c pensia de ntreinere se datoreaz de la Civil Code).
data cererii de chemare n judecat (art. 532 alin.
1) ns poate fi acordat i pentru o perioad 2.4. The Date since the Support is
anterioar dac introducerea cererii de chemare Owed
n judecat a fost ntrziat din culpa debitorului Unlike the Family Code that does not
(art. 532 alin. 2). contain stipulations referring to the date since the
support is owed, in the new Civil Code, the date
2.5. Executarea obligaiei de since the support is owed is expressly regulated
ntreinere by the stipulations of art. 532 that shows that the
n reglementarea noului Cod Civil supporting alimony is owed since the date of the
obligaia de ntreinere se poate executa n petition to call to judgement (art. 532, paragraph
natur sau prin plata unei pensii n bani. 1) but it may also be granted for a previous time
Potrivit art. 530 alin. 1 din noul Cod period if the introduction of the petition to call to
civil obligaia de ntreinere se execut n natur, judgement was delayed because of the debtor
prin asigurarea celor necesare traiului i, dup (art. 532, paragraph 2).
caz, a cheltuielilor pentru educare, nvtur i
pregtire profesional. Dac obligaia de 2.5. Execution of the Support
ntreinere nu se execut de bun voie, n natur, Obligation
alineatul 2 al aceluiai articol prevede c In the regulation of the new Civil Code,
instana de tutel dispune executarea ei prin the support obligation may be executed in kind
plata unei pensii de ntreinere, stabilit n bani. or by paying alimony.
n conformitate cu prevederile art. 533 According to art. 530, paragraph 1 of the
alin. 1 din noul Cod civil pensia de ntreinere new Civil Code, the supporting obligation is
se pltete n rate periodice, la termenele executed in kind, by providing the things
convenite de pri sau, n lipsa acordului lor, la necessary for the living and, depending on the
cele stabilite prin hotrre judectoreasc. case, the expenditures for education, instruction
Un element de noutate pe care l aduce and professional training. If the supporting
noul Cod civil fa de prevederile Codului obligation is not voluntarily executed in king,
familiei, este acela c art. 533 alin. 3 d paragraph 2 of the same article stipulates that the
posibilitatea prilor, sau, dac exist motive guardian court disposes its execution by paying a
temeinice, instanei de tutel, de a conveni, supporting alimony established in money.
respectiv de a hotr ca ntreinerea s se According to the stipulations of art. 533,
execute prin plata anticipat a unei sume globale paragraph 1 of the new Civil Code, the
care s acopere nevoile de ntreinere ale celui supporting alimony is paid in periodical
ndreptit pe o perioad mai ndelungat sau pe instalments, at the terms established by the
ntreaga perioad n care se datoreaz parties or, in the absence of their agreement, at
131
ntreinerea n msura n care debitorul the ones established by the judicial decision.
ntreinerii are mijloacele necesare acoperirii A new element brought by the new Civil
acestei obligaii. Code to the stipulations of the Family Code is
that art. 533, paragraph 3 gives the possibility to
2.6. Modificarea i ncetarea the parties or, if there are serious reasons, to the
pensiei de ntreinere guardian court, to agree, respectively to decide
n temeiul art. 531 alin. 1 din noul Cod for the support to be executed by the anticipated
civil instana de tutel poate mri sau micora payment of a global amount that should cover
pensia de ntreinere, sau poate hotr ncetarea the supporting needs of the one who has to right
plii ei, potrivit mprejurrilor, dac se ivete o to it for a longer lapse of time or for the entire
schimbare n ceea ce privete mijloacele celui time of the support to the extent where the debtor
care presteaz ntreinerea i nevoia celui care o of the support has the means needed in order to
primete. cover this obligation.
Din interpretarea restrictiv a acestui
articol s-ar putea trage concluzia c modificarea 2.6. Change and Cessation of the
ntreinerii este posibil dac cele dou condiii Support Alimony
privitoare la modificarea mijloacelor debitorului Based on art. 531, paragraph 1 of the
i la modificarea nevoilor creditorului sunt new Civil Code, the guardian court may increase
ndeplinite cumulativ, spre deosebire de or decrease the supporting alimony or may
dispoziiile art. 94 alin. 2 Codul familiei care decide the cessation of its payment, according to
reglementeaz posibilitatea instanei de a mri the circumstances, if there appears a change
sau micora cuantumul ntreinerii dac s-au regarding the means of the one who performs the
schimbat fie mijloacele celui care d support and the need of the one who receives it.
ntreinerea, fie nevoia celui care o primete. Nu From the restrictive interpretation of this
credem ns c voina legiuitorului a fost aceea article, we may conclude that the change of the
ca ambele condiii s fie ndeplinite pentru a fi support is possible if the two conditions
posibil modificarea ntinderii ntreinerii ci regarding the change of the debtors means and
admitem posibilitatea strecurrii unei erori n the change of the creditors needs are
formularea textului articolului 531 alin. 1 din cumulatively accomplished, unlike the
noul Cod civil. n consecin, credem c pentru stipulations of art. 94, paragraph 2 of Family
modificarea cuantumului ntreinerii este Code that regulates the court possibility to
suficient s intervin modificri n ceea ce increase or decrease the support quantum if there
privete unul dintre cele dou elemente n was a change in the means of the one who gives
funcie de care se stabilete ntreinerea. the support or in the need of the one who
Un element de noutate pe care noul Cod receives it. But we do not think that the
civil l aduce n privina modificrii ntinderii legislators will was for both conditions to be
ntreinerii este acela c se prevede expres c accomplished in order to make possible the
pensia de ntreinere stabilit ntr-o sum fix se change of the support extent, but we admit the
indexeaz de drept, trimestrial, n funcie de rata possibility for an error to exist in the wording of
inflaiei (art. 531 alin. 2). the text of article 531, paragraph 1 of the new
Obligaia prinilor de a ntreine Civil Code. As a consequence, we believe that
minorul nceteaz prin ajungerea acestuia la for the change of the support quantum it is
majorat. nainte ca minorul s mplineasc enough to appear changes regarding one of the
vrsta majoratului obligaia prinilor de a-l two elements depending on which the support is
ntreine poate nceta prin cstoria acestuia la established.
mplinirea vrstei de 16 ani n condiiile art. 272 A new element brought by the new Civil
alin. 2-5 din noul Cod civil. Code regarding the change of the support extent
Dup mplinirea vrstei de 18 ani de is that it is expressly stipulated that the
132
ctre copil prinii au obligaia de a-l ntreine supporting alimony established in a stable
numai dac acesta se afl n continuarea amount is indexed by the law, per trimester,
studiilor. Aceast obligaie a prinilor este depending on the inflation rate (art. 531,
expres reglementat de prevederile art. 499 paragraph 2).
alin. 3 din noul Cod civil i exist potrivit The parents obligation to support the
aceluiai text, pn cnd copilul termin minor stops when he reaches the full age. Before
studiile dar fr a depi vrsta de 26 de ani. the minor reaches the full age, the parents
Obligaia de ntreinere a minorului obligation to support him may stop if he gets
mai poate nceta i prin decesul printelui married when reaching 16 in conditions of art.
debitor al acestei obligaii ori al minorului 272, paragraph 2-5 of the new Civil Code.
(art. 514 alin. 2 din noul Cod civil). Ca After the child reaches 18, the parents
noutate, n noul Cod civil se prevede c dac have the obligation to support him only if he
creditorul ntreinerii a decedat n perioada continues his studies. This obligation of the
corespunztoare unei rate, ntreinerea este parents is expressly regulated by the stipulations
datorat n ntregime pentru acea perioad of art. 499, paragraph 3 of the new Civil Code
(art. 533 alin. 2). and it exists according to the same text until the
n cazul n care debitor al obligaiei de child achieves his studies, but without crossing
ntreinere este tatl ncetarea acesteia are loc the age of 26.
i n cazul n care el tgduiete cu succes The obligation to support the minor may
paternitatea copilului. Acesta va putea cere also stop because of the death of the parent who
restituirea sumelor prestate anterior tgduirii is debtor of this obligation or of the minor (art.
paternitii cu titlu de pensie de ntreinere n 514, paragraph 2 of the new Civil Code). As a
temeiul art. 534 din noul Cod civil care new element, the new Civil Code stipulates that,
reglementeaz restituirea ntreinerii if the creditor of the support died during an
nedatorate. Potrivit acestui articol cel care a instalment, the support is entirely owed for that
executat obligaia poate s cear restituirea de time period (art. 533, paragraph 2).
la cel care a primit-o sau de la cel care avea, n If the debtor of the supporting obligation
realitate, obligaia s o presteze, n acest din is the father, its cessation occurs also if he
urm caz, pe temeiul mbogirii fr just successfully denies the childs paternity. He will
cauz, dac, din orice motiv, se dovedete c be able to ask for the restitution of the amounts
ntreinerea prestat, de bunvoie sau ca performed before the denial of the paternity as
urmare a unei hotrri judectoreti, nu era supporting alimony based on art. 534 of the new
datorat. Civil Code that regulates the restitution of the
non-owed support. According to this article, the
Bibliografie one who executed the obligation may demand
the restitution from the one who received it or
V. Georgescu, Obligaia de ntreinere a from the one who actually had the obligation to
prinilor fa de copiii lor minori n dreptul perform it, in this last case, based on the
R.P.R., n Legalitatea Popular, nr. 6/1957; enrichment with no fair cause, if, by any reason,
E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, it is proved that the support performed
Ocrotirea printeasc.(Drepturile i voluntarily or as a consequence of a judicial
ndatoririle prinilor fa de copiii minori), decision, was not owed.
Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1960;
Sc. erbnescu, Codul familiei comentat i Bibliography:
adnotat, Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1963;
T. R. Popescu, Dreptul familiei. Tratat, vol. II, V. Georgescu, The Parents Obligation to
Ediie revzut, Editura Didactic i Support their Minor Children in R.P.R. Law, in
Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1965; Peoples Legality, no. 6/1957;
133
I. Albu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Didactic i E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Parental

Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1975; Protection. (Parents Rights and Duties
Al. Bacaci, Raporturile juridice patrimoniale regarding their Minor Children), Scientific
n dreptul familiei, Editura Dacia, Cluj- Press, Bucharest, 1960
Napoca, 1986; Sc. erbnescu, Commented and Annotated
Al. Bacaci, Obligaia de ntreinere dintre Family Code, Scientific Press, Bucharest, 1963
prini i copii, n Revista Romn de T. R. Popescu, Family Law. Treaty, vol. II,
Drept, nr. 10/1987; Reviewed Edition, Didactic and Pedagogical
Legislaia familiei i practica judiciar n Press, Bucharest, 1965
materie, Ministerul Justiiei, 1987, (Lucrare I. Albu, Family Law, Didactic and Pedagogical
redactat de: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Press, Bucharest, 1975
Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu); Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Juridical Reports in
I. Mihu, Culegere de practic judiciar n Family Law, Dacia Press, Cluj-Napoca, 1986
materie civil pe anul 1990; Al. Bacaci, The Supporting Obligation between
Probleme de drept din deciziile Curii Parents and Children, in Romanian Law
Supreme de Justiie, 1990-1992, Editura Review, no. 10/1987
Orizonturi, Bucureti, 1993; Family Legislation and Judicial Practice in
D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Legislaia Matter, Ministry of Justice, 1987, (Work edited
familiei, vol. I, Editura Moldova, Iai, 1997; by: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana
Culegere de practic judiciar a Tribunalului Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu)
Bucureti 1993-1997, Coordonator D. I. Mihu, Judicial Practice Book in Civil Matter
Lupacu, Editura all Beck, Bucureti, 1998; for the year 1990
I. P. Filipescu, Tratat de dreptul familiei, Law Problems in the Decisions of the Supreme
Ediia a V-a, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, Justice Court, 1990-1992, Orizonturi Press,
2000; Bucharest, 1993
I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Family Legislation,
ntreinerea n contextul drepturilor vol. I, Moldova Press, Iai, 1997
fundamentale, Editura Themis, Craiova, 2001; Judicial Practice Book of Bucharest Court 1993-
Buletinul jurisprudenei, 1990-2003, lucrare 1997, Coordinator D. Lupacu, all Beck Press,
realizat de S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Bucharest, 1998
Lazr, I. Ionescu, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, I. P. Filipescu, Family Law Treaty, the 5th
2003; Edition, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2000
P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, Support in
Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005; the Context of the Basic Rights, Themis Press,
D. Lupacu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Rosetti, Craiova, 2001
Bucureti, 2005; Jurisprudence Bulletin, 1990-2003, work
F. Ciutacu, Dreptul familiei. Culegere de accomplished by S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A.
spee. Modele de aciuni, Editura Themis Cart, Lazr, I. Ionescu, All Beck Press, Bucharest,
2005; 2003
Al. Bacaci, Raporturile patrimoniale n P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition,
dreptul familiei, Ediia 2, Editura Hamangiu, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005
Bucureti, 2007; D. Lupacu, Family Law, Rosetti Press,
E. Rou, Dreptul familiei. Practic judiciar. Bucharest, 2005
Hotrri C.E.D.O., Editura Hamangiu, F. Ciutacu, Family Law. Causes Book. Models of
Bucureti, 2007; Actions, Themis Cart Press, 2005
T. Bodoac, Discuii referitoare la Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Reports in Family Law,
interpretarea art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, n 2nd Edition, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007
Dreptul, nr. 10/2008; E. Rou, Family Law. Judicial Practice.
134
A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discuii privind C.E.D.O. Decisions, Hamangiu Press,

determinarea cuantumului ntreinerii pe care Bucharest, 2007
printele sau adoptatorul o datoreaz T. Bodoac, Discussions referring to the
copilului, n Dreptul nr. 6/2009; interpretation of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family
Code, in Law, no. 10/2008
A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discussions regarding the
Determination of the Quantum of the Support
owed to the Child by the Parent or by the
Adopter, in Law no. 6/2009
1
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 351 din 21 februarie 1980, n Revista Romn de Drept, nr. 9/1980, p. 60.
2
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 993 din 13 decembrie 1954 n ,,Legalitatea Popular nr. 1/1955, p. 84.
3
E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Ocrotirea printeasc.(Drepturile i ndatoririle prinilor fa de copiii minori),
Editura tiinific, Bucureti, 1960, p. 176.
4
Al. Bacaci, Obligaia de ntreinere dintre prini i copii, n Revista Romn de Drept, nr. 10/1987, p. 30. n acelai sens
a se vedea Trib. Suprem, Col. civ., dec. nr. 1621/1956, n Legalitatea Popular, nr. 9/1957, p.1137. n sensul c ceea ce se
prezum este incapacitatea de munc n timpul minoritii, prezumie juris tantum care poate fi rsturnat prin proba contrar,
iar nevoia n care minorul se afl trebuie dovedit a se vedea T. R. Popescu, Dreptul familiei. Tratat, vol. II, Ediie revzut,
Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1965, p. 204; Sc. erbnescu, Codul familiei comentat i adnotat, Editura
tiinific, Bucureti, 1963, p. 246.
5
Trib. jud. Galai, dec. civ. nr. 384 din 12 mai 1972, n Legislaia familiei i practica judiciar n materie, Ministerul Justiiei,
1987, (Lucrare redactat de: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu) p. 460.
6
I. Albu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1975, p. 302; T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 203; I. P.
Filipescu, Tratat de dreptul familiei, Ediia a V-a, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2000, p. 471.
7
Fostul Trib. al Capitalei, , col. II civ., dec. nr. 1860 din 04 august 1955, n Legalitatea Popular nr. 7/1955, p. 812.
8
Al. Bacaci, Raporturile patrimoniale n dreptul familiei, Ediia 2, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007, p. 225.
9
E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, op. cit., p. 108 i urm; V. Georgescu, Obligaia de ntreinere a prinilor fa de
copiii lor minori n dreptul R.P.R., n Legalitatea Popular, nr. 6/1957;
10
T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 204.
11
Al. Bacaci, Raporturile juridice patrimoniale n dreptul familiei, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1986, p. 217-218.
12
Trib. Arge, dec. civ. nr. 185/1958 cu not de A. Hinsenrad, n Legalitatea Popular nr. 11/1959, p. 118; Trib. Capitalei,
col. VI civil, dec. nr. 2033/1952 n Justiia Nou, nr. 3/1958, p. 330.
13
Trib. Jud. Iai, dec. civ. nr. 8091/1968, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 9/1969, p. 142.
14
Trib. Jud. Neam, dec. civ. nr. 295/1982, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 12/1982, p. 63.
15
nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Secia civil, dec. nr. 3393 din 6 mai 2004; dec. nr. 3582 din 14 mai 2004, n E. Rou,
Dreptul familiei. Practic judiciar. Hotrri C.E.D.O., Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007, p. 111 i urm; Trib. Mun.
Bucureti, Secia a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 1006/1992, n Tribunalul Municipiului Bucureti, Culegere de practic judiciar
civil pe anul 1992, p. 58-59.
16
Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a III-a civil, dec. nr. 46/1992, n Tribunalulop. cit., p. 58; nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie,
Secia civil, dec. nr. 3795 din 20 mai 2004 n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 105-107; Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a IV-a civil, dec. nr.
973 din 15 mai 2006, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 119-121.
17
Citat de P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005, p. 481.
18
Trib. Suprem, sec. civ. dec. nr. 2188/1977, n CD 1977, p. 119.
19
Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 1812 din 3 septembrie 1991 n Buletinul jurisprudenei, 1990-2003, lucrare
realizat de S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Lazr, I. Ionescu, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2003, p. 493-494; Trib. Suprem,
Sec. civ., dec. nr. 2108 din 3 decembrie 1975, n Legislaia familiei i practica judiciar n materie, Ministerul Justiiei, 1987
(Lucrare redactat de: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu), p. 463-464.
20
Trib. Suprem, Sec. civ., dec nr. 524 din 11 martie 1980, n Legislaia familiei, op. cit., p. 464.
21
I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 478.
22
Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 641 din 11 aprilie 1990, n Buletinul jurisprudenei 1990-2003op. cit., p.
493.
23
Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 786 din 06 aprilie 1993, n Buletinul jurisprudenei 1990-2003op. cit., p.
494.
135
24
Trib. Suprem, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 864 din 12 aprilie 1972 n Legislaia familieiop. cit., p. 467.
25
Trib. Jud. Timi, dec. civ. nr. 322 din 14 martie 1980, n Legislaia familieiop. cit., p. 467.
26
Trib. Suprem, Col. civ., dec. nr. 378/1955 n CD 1955, vol. I, p. 234-236; Trib. jud. Slaj, dec. civ. nr. 281/1980, n
Revista Romn de Drept nr. 3/1981, p. 58-59.
27
Trib. Suprem, sec. civ. dec. nr. 1556/1976 n CD 1976, p. 175; Trib. jud. Hunedoara, dec. civ. nr. 749/1974, n Revista
Romn de Drept nr. 1/1979, p. 54.
28
Al. Bacaci, Raporturileop. cit., 1986, p. 233.
29
Curtea Suprem de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 625 din 10 aprilie 1990 n Probleme de drept din deciziile Curii Supreme de
Justiie, 1990-1992, Editura Orizonturi, Bucureti, 1993, p. 210.
30
I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, ntreinerea n contextul drepturilor fundamentale, Editura Themis, Craiova, 2001, p.
328; D. Lupacu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Rosetti, Bucureti, 2005, p. 280.
31
Trib Suprem, dec. de ndrumare nr. 12 din 30 septembrie 1967, n Legislaia familieiop. cit., p. 221-223.
32
Idem.
33
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 961 din 27 august 1958, n CD, 1958, p. 232.
34
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 1957 din 12 decembrie 1962, n Justiia Nou nr. 12/1963, p. 168.
35
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 2047/1979 n CD, 1979, p. 164; nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 2773 din 7
aprilie 2004, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 117-118.
36
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 1191/1972 n CD, 1972, p. 227; dec. civ. nr. 1507/1971, n CD, 1971, p. 150. n cazuri
excepionale, cnd nevoile copiilor minori ndreptii la ntreinere sunt aproximativ aceleai, se poate determina i o sum
global pentru toi minorii. n acest sens a se vedea Trib. Suprem, dec. de ndrumare, nr. 16/1965, n CD 1952-1965, p. 139.
37
Trib. Suprem, Sec civ., dec. nr. 2047 din 13 noiembrie 1979, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 3/1989, p. 66.
38
nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Secia civil i de proprietate intelectual, dec. nr. 3317 din 25 aprilie 2005, n E. Rou,
op. cit., p. 103-105.
39
Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Sec. a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 513/1992, n Tribunalul Municipiului Bucureti, Culegere de practic
judiciar civil pe anul 1992, p. 57; Curtea de Apel Craiova Secia civil, dec. nr. 5146 din 5 noiembrie 1997, nepublicat, n
F. Ciutacu, Dreptul familiei. Culegere de spee. Modele de aciuni, Editura Themis Cart, 2005, p. 76.
40
T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 219; I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 475; Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 2304 din 18 noiembrie 1955, n
CD, 1955, vol. I, p. 238.
41
T. Bodoac, Discuii referitoare la interpretarea art. 94 alin. 3 Codul familiei, n Dreptul, nr. 10/2008, p. 80-83.
42
Curtea Constituional, decizia nr. 327 din 14 septembrie 2004, definitiv, publicat n Monitorul oficial al Romniei, nr.
866 din 22 septembrie 2004; decizia nr. 168 din 28 februarie 2006, definitiv, publicat n Monitorul oficial al Romniei
nr. 269 din 24 martie 2006.
43
Trib. Suprem, dec. civ. nr. 1590/1960, n C.D. 1960, p. 305.
44
Trib. Suprem., Sec. civ., dec. nr. 241 din 1 martie 1961 n D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Legislaia familiei, vol. I, Editura
Moldova, Iai, 1997, p. 281.
45
Trib. Jud. Tulcea, dec. civ. nr. 204 din 20 mai 1976, n Legislaia familiei,...op. cit., p. 458.
46
Al. Bacaci, V.-Cl. Dumitrache, C. Hageanu, op. cit., p. 297-298.
47
nalta Curte de Casaie i Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 3802 din 20 mai 2004, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 109-111; Curtea Suprem
de Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 1526 din 200 august 1992, n Buletinul Jurisprudeneiop. cit., p. 494.
48
Trib. Suprem, dec. de ndrumare nr. 2 din 20 februarie 1971, n Legislaia familiei,op. cit., p. 230-233; n aceslai sens
Trib. Suprem, Sec civ., dec. nr. 351 din 21 februarie 1980, n Legislaia familiei,op. cit., p. 473; nalta Curte de Casaie i
Justiie, Sec. civ., dec. nr. 3799 din 20 mai 2004, n E. Rou, op. cit., p. 107-109.
49
Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Sec. a IV-a civil, dec. nr. 1055 din 20 mai 1993, n Culegere de practic judiciar a Tribunalului
Bucureti 1993-1997, Coordonator D. Lupacu, Editura all Beck, Bucureti, 1998, p. 202.
50
Trib. Jud. Bistria-Nsud, dec. civ. nr. 188/1971, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 11/1972, p. 159.
51
Trib. Suprem, dec. de ndrumare nr. 19/1964, n CD 1964, p. 39; Trib. Mun. Bucureti, Secia a III-a civ., dec. nr.
287/1990, n I. Mihu, Culegere de practic judiciar n materie civil pe anul 1990, p. 41.
52
Trib. Suprem, col. civ., dec. nr. 1590/1960, n CD 1960, p. 305.
53
P. Anca, not aprobativ la dec. fostului Trib. Reg. Suceava, nr. 661/1965, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 5/1967, p.
133-136.
54
V. Ptulea, not critic la dec. fostului Trib. Reg Suceava, nr. 661/1965, n Revista Romn de Drept nr. 5/1967, p. 132-
133.
55
Prevederile noului Cod Civil reglementeaz att nedemnitatea de drept (art. 958) ct i nedemnitatea judiciar (art. 959).
56
n acest sens a se vedea A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discuii privind determinarea cuantumului ntreinerii pe care printele sau
adoptatorul o datoreaz copilului, n Dreptul nr. 6/2009, p. 133.
57
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 351 since February, 21st 1980, in Romanian Law Review, no. 9/1980, p. 60.
136
58
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 993 since December, 13th 1954 in ,Peoples Legality no. 1/1955, p. 84.
59
E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Parental Protection. (Parents Rights and Duties regarding their Minor
Children), op. cit., p. 176.
60
Al. Bacaci, The Supporting Obligation between Parents and Children, in Romanian Law Review, no. 10/1987, p. 30.
In the same sense, see Supreme Court, Civil Col., decision no. 1621/1956, in Peoples Legality, no. 9/1957, p.1137.
Namely, it is presumed the inability to work during minority, a juris tantum presumption that can be turned by the contrary
evidence, and the minors need must be proved, see T. R. Popescu, Family Law. Treaty, vol. II, Reviewed Edition, Didactic
and Pedagogical Press, Bucharest, 1965, p. 204; Sc. erbnescu, Commented and Annotated Family Code, Scientific Press,
Bucharest, 1963, p. 246.
61
County Court. Galai, civil decision no. 384 since May, 12th 1972, in Family Legislation and Judicial Practice in Matter,
Ministry of Justice, 1987, (Work edited by: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu) p. 460.
62
I. Albu, Family Law, Didactic and Pedagogical Press, Bucharest, 1975, p. 302; T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 203; I. P.
Filipescu, Family Law Treaty, the 5th Edition, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2000, p. 471.
63
Ex Capital Court, civil col. II, decision no. 1860 since August, 4th 1955, in Peoples Legality no. 7/1955, p. 812.
64
Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Reports in Family Law, 2nd Edition, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007, p. 225.
65
E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, op. cit., p. 108 and the following ones; V. Georgescu, The Parents Obligation to
Support their Minor Children in R.P.R. Law, in Peoples Legality, no. 6/1957;
66
T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 204.
67
Al. Bacaci, Patrimonial Juridical Reports in Family Law, Dacia Press, Cluj-Napoca, 1986, p. 217-218.
68
Arge Court, civil decision no. 185/1958 with note by A. Hinsenrad, in Peoples Legality no. 11/1959, p. 118; Capital
Court, civil col. VI, decision no. 2033/1952 in New Justice, no. 3/1958, p. 330.
69
Iai County Court, civil decision no. 8091/1968, in Romanian Law Review no. 9/1969, p. 142.
70
Neam County Court, civil decision no. 295/1982, in Romanian Law Review no. 12/1982, p. 63.
71
High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3393 since May, 6th 2004; decision no. 3582 since May,
th
14 2004, in E. Rou, Family Law. Judicial Practice. C.E.D.O. Decisions, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007, p. 111 and the
following ones; Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 1006/1992, in Bucharest Municipal Court,
Civil Judicial Practice Book for the year 1992, p. 58-59.
72
Bucharest Municipal Court, the 3rd Civil Section, decision no. 46/1992, in Courtop. cit., p. 58; High Cassation and
Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3795 since May, 20th 2004 in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 105-107; Bucharest Municipal
Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 973 since May, 15th 2006, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 119-121.
73
Quoted by P. Courbe, Droit de la famille, 4e dition, Armand Colin, Dalloz, Paris, 2005, p. 481.
74
Supreme Court, civil section, decision no. 2188/1977, in CD 1977, p. 119.
75
Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 1812 since September, 3rd 1991 in Jurisprudence Bulletin, 1990-2003,
work accomplished by S. Angheni, M. Avram, R. A. Lazr, I. Ionescu, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2003, p. 493-494;
Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 2108 since December, 3rd 1975, in Family Legislation and Judicial Practice in
Matter, Ministry of Justice, 1987 (a work edited by: Ioan Hatmanu, Anatolie Arhip, Ana Iacovescu, Teodor Popescu), p.
463-464.
76
Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 524 since March, 11th 1980, in Family Legislation, op. cit., p. 464.
77
I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 478.
78
Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 641 since April, 11th 1990, in Jurisprudence Bulletin 1990-2003op.
cit., p. 493.
79
Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 786 since April, 6th 1993, in Jurisprudence Bulletin 1990-2003op.
cit., p. 494.
80
Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 864 since April, 12th 1972 in Family Legislationop. cit., p. 467.
81
Timi County Court, civil decision no. 322 since March, 14th 1980, in Family Legislationop. cit., p. 467.
82
Supreme Court, Civil Col., decision no. 378/1955 in CD 1955, vol. I, p. 234-236; Slaj County Court, civil decision no.
281/1980, in Romanian Law Review no. 3/1981, p. 58-59.
83
Supreme Court, civil section, no. 1556/1976 in CD 1976, p. 175; Hunedoara County Court, civil decision no. 749/1974,
in Romanian Law Review no. 1/1979, p. 54.
84
Al. Bacaci, Reportsop. cit., 1986, p. 233.
85
Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 625 since April, 10th 1990 in Law Problems in the Decisions of the
Supreme Justice Court, 1990-1992, Orizonturi Press, Bucharest, 1993, p. 210.
86
I. Dogaru, S. Cercel, D. C. Dnior, Support in the Context of the Basic Rights, Themis Press, Craiova, 2001, p. 328; D.
Lupacu, Family Law, Rosetti Press, Bucharest, 2005, p. 280.
87
Supreme Court, guiding decision no. 12 since September, 30th 1967, in Family Legislationop. cit., p. 221-223.
88
Idem.
137
89
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 961 since August, 27th 1958, in CD, 1958, p. 232.
90
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 1957 since December, 12th 1962, in New Justice no. 12/1963, p. 168.
91
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 2047/1979 in CD, 1979, p. 164; High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section,
decision no. 2773 since April, 7th 2004, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 117-118.
92
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 1191/1972 in CD, 1972, p. 227; civil decision no. 1507/1971, in CD, 1971, p. 150. In
exceptional cases, when the needs of the minor children having the right to be supported are approximately the same, we may
also determine a global amount for all the minors. In this sense, see Supreme Court, guiding decision, no. 16/1965, in CD
1952-1965, p. 139.
93
Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 2047 since November, 13th 1979, in Romanian Law Review no. 3/1989, p.
66.
94
High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil and Intellectual Property Section, decision no. 3317 since April, 25th 2005, in E.
Rou, op. cit., p. 103-105.
95
Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 513/1992, in Bucharest Municipal Court, Civil Judicial
Practice Book for the year 1992, p. 57; Craiova Appeal Court Civil Section, Decision no. 5146 since November, 5th 1997,
unpublished, in F. Ciutacu, Family Law. Causes Book. Models of Actions, Themis Cart Press, 2005, p. 76.
96
T. R. Popescu, op. cit., p. 219; I. P. Filipescu, op. cit., p. 475; Supreme Court, civil decision no. 2304 since November,
18th 1955, in CD, 1955, vol. I, p. 238.
97
T. Bodoac, Discussions referring to the interpretation of art. 94, paragraph 3 of Family Code, in Law, no. 10/2008,
p. 80-83.
98
Constitutional Court, decision no. 327 since September, 14th 2004, being definitive, published in Romanias Official
Gazette, no. 866 since September, 22nd 2004; decision no. 168 since February, 28th 2006, being definitive, published in
Romanias Official Gazette no. 269 since March, 24th 2006.
99
Supreme Court, civil decision no. 1590/1960, in C.D. 1960, p. 305.
100
Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 241 since March, 1st 1961 in D. Burghelea, I. Burghelea, Family Legislation,
vol. I, Moldova Press, Iai, 1997, p. 281.
101
Tulcea County Court, civil decision no. 204 since May, 20th 1976, in Family Legislation,...op. cit., p. 458.
102
Al. Bacaci, V.-Cl. Dumitrache, C. Hageanu, op. cit., p. 297-298.
103
High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3802 since May, 20th 2004, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 109-111;
Supreme Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 1526 since August, 20th 1992, in Jurisprudence Bulletinop. cit., p. 494.
104
Supreme Court, guiding decision no. 2 since February, 20th 1971, in Family Legislation,op. cit., p. 230-233; In the
same sense, Supreme Court, Civil Section, decision no. 351 since February, 21st 1980, in Family Legislation,op. cit., p.
473; High Cassation and Justice Court, Civil Section, decision no. 3799 since May, 20th 2004, in E. Rou, op. cit., p. 107-109.
105
Bucharest Municipal Court, the 4th Civil Section, decision no. 1055 since May, 20th 1993, in Judicial Practice Book of
Bucharest Court 1993-1997, Coordinator D. Lupacu, all Beck Press, Bucharest, 1998, p. 202.
106
Bistria-Nsud County Court, civil decision no. 188/1971, in Romanian Law Review no. 11/1972, p. 159.
107
Supreme Court, guiding decision no. 19/1964, in CD 1964, p. 39; Bucharest Municipal Court, the 3rd Civil Section,
decision no. 287/1990, in I. Mihu, Judicial Practice Book in Civil Matter for the year 1990, p. 41.
108
Supreme Court, civil col., decision no. 1590/1960, in CD 1960, p. 305.
109
P. Anca, approving note to the decision of Suceava Ex-Regional Court, no. 661/1965, in Romanian Law Review no.
5/1967, p. 133-136.
110
V. Ptulea, critical note for the decision of Suceava ex-County Court, no. 661/1965, in Romanian Law Review no.
5/1967, p. 132-133.
111
The stipulations of the new Civil Code regulate both the law indignity (art. 958) and the judicial indignity (art. 959).
112
In this sense, see A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discussions regarding the Determination of the Quantum of the Support owed to
the Child by the Parent or by the Adopter, in Law no. 6/2009, p. 133.
138

Obligatia de Intretinere

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Obligatia de Intretinere

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

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

ASPECTE TEORETICE I DE THEORETICAL AND JUDICIAL

Dr. Alin-Gheorghe GAVRILESCU - Lector PhD Alin-Gheorghe GAVRILESCU

I. Obligaia de ntreinere dintre I. The Supporting Obligation

1.1. Noiuni introductive. 1.1. Introductory Notions.

1.2. Debitorii i creditorii obligaiei 1.2. Debtors and Creditors of the

ntreinere se va acorda de la data pronunrii date of pronouncing the definitive divorce

1.7. Executarea obligaiei de 1.7. Execution of the Supporting

asemenea aciune32. stated that the prosecutor may exert such an

La stabilirea mijloacelor debitorului se ine adoption, respectively of certain criminal facts

I. Albu, Dreptul familiei, Editura Didactic i E. A. Barasch, I. Nestor, S. Zilberstein, Parental

A.-Gh. Gavrilescu, Discuii privind C.E.D.O. Decisions, Hamangiu Press,

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen