The relevant provisions of the former Romanian Civil Code concerning civil liability for tort, in particular Articles 998 and 999, are described in the case of Elena Cojocaru v.

Cojocaru, a lawyer in Tulcea. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their agent, Ms C. Brumar, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 3.

#xa0; Cocu Mariana Simona 81)              Codreanu Mariana 82)              Cojocaru

criminal proceedings, reasonably expecting that he or she would be able to raise civil claims in the criminal case, was not obliged to embark on a separate civil or disciplinary action (see Elena Cojocaru

imposed on the applicant lacked appropriate justification and that the standards applied by the domestic courts failed to ensure a fair balance between the relevant rights and related interests (see Cojocaru

Stăncescu-Cojocaru, lawyers practising in Bucharest.

  Cojocaru, lawyer, and the third applicant by Mr   C.L.   Popescu, lawyer. 3.     The Government were represented by their Agent, Ms   O.F.

Cojocaru, a lawyer practising in Bucharest. 2.     The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms C. Brumar, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A.

standards which were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10 and, moreover, that they relied on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts (see, among many other authorities, Cojocaru