The capacity as owner of an immovable asset – source of the guarantor position
Keywords: owner, immovable asset, duty to act, improper omission, commission by omission
It is well known that not every lack of action attracts criminal liability, but only that which involves the failure to fulfil an obligation to act. In the matter of the offense of improper omission, the Romanian Criminal Code provides as sources of the obligation to act the law, the contract and the previous conduct of the subject. In this context, we can ask to what extent the capacity as owner of an immovable asset could substantiate the obligation to act. The purpose of this article is to explore the various doctrinal and case law perspectives, Romanian and foreign, regarding this issue.