ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF ART. 196 (1) THESIS I IN THE CRIMINAL CODE BY THE DECISION NO. 8 / 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF CASSATION AND JUSTICE
ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF ART. 196 (1) THESIS I IN THE CRIMINAL CODE BY THE DECISION NO. 8 / 2018 OF THE HIGH COURT OF CASSATION AND JUSTICE

Summary/Abstract: The changes brought by the legislator in the new Criminal Code on the criminal offence of bodily injury by actionable negligence, provided by art. 196, cannot be found in the content of a sufficiently clear incriminating norm, so that enforcement of the same should not give rise to debates. Because of the partial lack of predictability of the concerned norm, the supreme court has been notified for solving the following law matter: “to acquire the specific nature of the criminal offence of bodily injury by actionable negligence, provided by art. 196 paragraph (1) thesis I in the Criminal Code, the phrase “under the influence of alcoholic beverages” must be interpreted as referring to a certain degree of pure alcohol imbibition in blood or, otherwise, the criminal liability of any person who has ingested alcohol, traceable by technical and medico – legal means provided by law, will be incurred, irrespective of his / her degree of blood alcohol imbibition”. The extensive interpretation of the supreme court is objectionable in itself, from the point of view of a tacit acceptation of the objective criminal liability instead of the subjective criminal liability based on proving the guilt, and this is the issue we are going to refer to below.

• Details
• Contents