Precedentul judiciar în Republica Moldova – provocare sau realitate?
The judicial precedent in the Republic of Moldova – challenge or finality?

Summary/Abstract: As judicial precedent is considered a previous judgment delivered by a court of law, which although is not a formal source of law, has the role to guide the judicial practice at a specific time, a judgment cited as an example or analogy to decide on similar issues of law in future cases. The judicial precedent is the result of the interpretation of law by a competent court, thereby forming the jurisprudence. The reorientation of the national legislation of the Republic of Moldova to the European and international standards of human rights and, particularly, the Moldova’s accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, has raised the issue of the opportunity of applying with the continental system of law the source of law which is characteristic to the common law system. The evolution of jurisprudence today is felt more and more. The difference between the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the existing national practice constitutes a system problem incompatible with the European Convention, the Republic of Moldova being kept under its positive obligations assumed to undertake effective measures of general character to solve this problem, including legislative changes to improve the legislation and its compliance with the principles laid down by the Court. Fully recognizing the power of judges to interpret the law, it is obvious their obligation to promote the security and predictability of justice. The principle of legal certainty ensures the predictability of content and application of the legal norm, thus guaranteeing a high quality of the justice act.

• Details
• Contents