Rules for reviewing materials submitted for publication to the Family Law Journal
*Modified by the Decision of the Governing Board of 20 Nov 2020, the Decision of the Governing Board of 21 Jan 2021 and the Decision of Governing Board of 11 Sept 2023
Chapter 1. General rules
Art. 1. The Rules for reviewing the materials submitted for publication to the Family Law Journal, hereinafter referred to as “the Review Rules”, describe the procedure for the analysis and review of materials submitted by interested authors for publication in the Family Law Journal, hereinafter referred to as “the RDF” or “the Journal”.
Art. 2. The Rules are adopted by the Governing Board of the Journal pursuant to Article 48 para. (2) of the Rules of Organisation and Functioning of the Family Law Journal.
Chapter 2. General conditions and registration of materials
Art. 3. Material submitted for publication must comply with the Principles of Publication set out in Annex 4 to the Rules of Organisation and Operation of the Family Law Journal.
Art. 4. If the material does not comply with the Publication Principles, the author will be given the opportunity to rewrite it and the deficiencies found will be stated.
Art. 5. The material shall be sent for publication only in electronic format to the e-mail address specially set up for this purpose and made public.
Art. 6. (1) All material submitted for publication shall be recorded in the Electronic Register of material submitted for publication, hereinafter referred to as the “Electronic Register”, which shall comprise:
- the full name of the author(s);
- the title of the material;
- the date of submission of the material for publication by the author;
- the material ID;
- the result of the verification carried out by the Editor-in-Chief, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief or the member of the Editorial Board and the date thereof;
- the date on which the material was sent for rewriting and the date to resend it;
- the sending date of the material to the designated Scientific Council member;
- the date of communication by the member of the Scientific Council of the Analysis Sheet provided for in Annex No 6 to the Rules of Organisation and Functioning of the Journal and the review result
- the date on which the material was sent for rewriting and the date to resend it;
- the sending date of the material to the designated Scientific Reviewer. If the Governing Board decides to merge the procedure laid down in Articles 55 and 56 of the Rules of Procedure, only the sending date of the material to the person designated to carry out the merged analysis shall be mentioned;
- the date of communication by the Scientific Reviewers of the Analysis Report provided for in Annex 7 to the Rules of Organisation and Functioning of the Review and the result of the analysis
- the date on which the material was sent for rewriting and the date to resend it;
- the date of communication to the author of the final result of the review;
- the Journal issue in which the material is published.
(2) The information referred to in paragraph (1) shall be mentioned according to the result of each stage of verification of the material.
Art. 7. (1) Within 3 days of receiving the material at the e-mail address provided for in Article 5, the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor-in-Chief, as the case may be, shall register it in the Electronic Register, mentioning the data provided for in Article 6 para. (1) (a-c).
(2) The person registering in accordance with paragraph 1 shall (1) shall assign a unique identification code to the material consisting of a letter corresponding to the type of material (“A” for articles and studies; “J” for summarized, annotated or annotated case law; “R” for reviews and “V” for other), the number in the register in which the material is registered and the date of registration (e.g. A-01-01 Jan 2019).
(3) The unique identification code assigned in accordance with paragraph (2) shall be used to identify the material throughout the review procedure.
(4) Immediately after registration and assignment of the identification number, one of the members of the Governing Board will proceed with the secrecy of the material, removing from it the name of the author and any other element likely to make a link between the material and the author, including the name of the author in the properties/details/authors section.
(5) Any attempt by the authors to introduce into the body of the material elements or information of such a nature as to link the material to them may result in the material being denied publication.
Chapter 3. Review procedure
Subchapter 3.1. Basic check
Art. 8. (1) Within a maximum of 15 days from the registration of the material in accordance with Article 7, the Editor-in-Chief or, as the case may be, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall classify the material in one of the sections of the Journal and to analyse it in accordance with Article 53 of the Rules of Organisation and Operation.
Art. 9. For the purposes of Article 8, the Editor-in-Chief or, where appropriate, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall verify that:
- the material falls under one of the sections of the Journal, namely: editorial, studies and articles or reviews and case law;
- the author’s identification details are given, as required by the Publication Principles;
- the material under review follows the specific structure of an editorial, study, article, summarized, commented or annotated case law or a review;
- the material is published in Romanian or in an international language;
- the material is written using Office Word (.doc/.docx);
- the material complies with the conditions laid down in paragraphs 3.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3 and 3.3 of the Publication Principles; it complies with the citation rules, the existence of the bibliographic list and the use of abbreviations as laid down in paragraphs 3.2.2, 3.2.3 and 3.3 of the Publication Principles;
- the bibliographic list exists;
- the material has no more than 3 authors;
- the declaration of authenticity and consent to the processing of personal data provided for in Annex 8 to the Organisational and Operational Regulation is attached to the material;
- the material does not contain any other obvious defect that would prevent publication.
(2) The person carrying out the verification may make any other notes considered appropriate.
Art. 10. (1) If the declaration referred to in Article 9(i) is not attached to the material, one of the members of the Governing Board shall send a copy of the declaration to the author at the e-mail address indicated for correspondence, with a note to return it completed and signed within 5 days of communication.
(2) If the declaration is not reverted completed and signed within the period of 5 days referred to in paragraph (1), the material shall automatically be rejected from publication, and the author shall be informed thereof by the person who made the communication under paragraph (1), within a maximum of 15 days after the expiry of that period.
Art. 11. (1) If the material submitted for publication does not comply with the conditions checked in accordance with Article 9, except for point i, the Editor-in-Chief or, where applicable, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall notify the author of the deficiencies found at the e-mail address indicated for correspondence, with the mention to remedy them within a maximum of 15 days of communication.
(2) If the deficiencies are not remedied within the period provided for in paragraph (1), the Editor-in-Chief or, where appropriate, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall submit the material to the Governing Board for a vote to continue the review procedure or, where appropriate, to deny it from publication. The Governing Board may also decide to deny material from publication if the defects found are of substance, such as when the citation rules have not been systematically respected. The resolution is adopted by a majority vote.
(3) Continuation of the review procedure is only possible if the defect found is not substantial and can be remedied subsequently.
(4) If it has been decided to deny the article from publication, the author will be notified to this effect by one of the members of the Governing Board no later than 5 days after the decision has been taken.
Art. 12. If the material meets the conditions laid down in Article 9 or if the shortcomings found have been remedied, the Editor-in-Chief or, where appropriate, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall submit the proposal to continue the review procedure to the Governing Board. The resolution is adopted by majority vote.
Subchapter 3.2. Repealed
Subchapter 3.3. Analysis by the Scientific Council member
Art. 17. (1) With the decision to continue the review procedure, adopted in accordance with Article 12, the Governing Board shall appoint the person from the Scientific Council to carry out the review provided for in Article 55 of the Rules of Organisation and Functioning. The appointment decision is adopted by majority vote.
(2) When making the appoint, the Governing Board shall ensure that the designated person does not have the same institutional affiliation as the author and that there are no aspects that may impede on the objectiveness of the review.
Art. 18. (1) Within 5 days of the adoption of the decision, the Editor-in-Chief or, as the case may be, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall notify the designated person of the appointment and of an electronic or hard copy of the material under review.
(2) The designated person shall immediately inform the Governing Board if he/she is unable to proceed with the analysis of the material.
(3) If the designated person is unable to proceed with the analysis of the material, the Governing Board shall immediately appoint a second member of the Scientific Council. Art. 17 and Art. 18 para. (1) and (2) remain applicable.
Art. 19. (1) The person designated in accordance with Article 17 or Article 18 para. (3), as the case may be, shall verify the material submitted for publication within a maximum of 15 days of its communication.
(2) At this stage of the analysis, the originality of the material and its contribution to the science of law shall be verified.
(3) In addition to the items referred to in paragraph (2) the designated person may make any comments he or she deems appropriate on the material under examination.
(4) The result of the analysis shall be recorded in the form provided for in Annex No 6 to the Rules of Organisation and Functioning and shall be immediately brought to the attention of the Governing Board by communicating the completed form in pdf or letter format.
Art. 20. (1) Within 5 days of receipt of the analysis, the conclusions of the designated person shall be submitted to the vote of the Governing Board, which shall decide by majority vote.
(2) If the designated person has made comments to improve the material or to remedy any defects, one of the members of the Governing Board shall forward the comments to the author at the indicated e-mail address with a note to comply with them within 10 days of communication.
(3) If the author complies with the obligations laid down for it under paragraph (2), the Governing Board may decide, as appropriate, to resume the examination procedure from Article 17 or to continue the review procedure.
(4) If the author fails to comply with the obligations imposed on him under paragraph (2), the Governing Board shall decide to deny the material from publication or to continue the review procedure.
(5) The Governing Board may also decide to deny the material from publication if the defects found are of a substantive nature, as is the case if it is found that the author has not complied with the rules on copy right.
(6) The decision to deny the material from publication shall be notified to the author within 5 days of adoption.
(7) If material has been denied from publication, it may not be re-analysed until the procedure is resumed in full.
(8) If no defects are found during the verification, the Governing Board shall order the review procedure to continue.
Subchapter 3.4. Verification by Scientific Reviewers
Art. 21. (1) With the decision to continue the review procedure, adopted in accordance with Article 20, the Governing Board shall appoint a scientific referee from the list specially drawn up for this purpose, or, where appropriate, provisionally designated, to carry out the verification provided for in Article 56 of the Organisational and Operational Rules. The appointment decision is adopted by majority vote.
(2) When appointing the scientific referee, the Governing Board shall ensure that the designated person does not have the same institutional affiliation as the author and that there are no aspects that may impede on the objectiveness of the review.
Art. 22. (1) Within 5 days of the adoption of the decision, the Editor-in-Chief or, as the case may be, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall notify the scientific reviewer of his/her appointment and an electronic copy of the material under review.
(2) The reviewer is obliged to inform the Governing Board immediately if it is unable to proceed with the analysis of the material.
(3) If the reviewer is unable to analyse the material, the Governing Board shall immediately appoint another reviewer. Art. 21 and Art. 22 para. (1) and (2) remain applicable.
Art. 23. (1) The reviewer designated in accordance with Article 21 or Article 22 para. (3), as the case may be, shall check the material submitted for publication within a maximum of 20 days of its communication.
(2) At this stage of analysis, in addition to the elements referred to in Article 9(f) and Article 19(2), the impact that the material may have on the field of family law, the appropriateness of the research technique used, the correct correlation between the different sections of the material, the accuracy and coherence of the scientific discourse and the relevance of the bibliographical material used.
(3) In addition to the items referred to in paragraph (2), the reviewer may make any comments he deems appropriate on the material under review.
(4) The result of the analysis shall be recorded in the Report provided for in Annex No 7 to the Rules of Organisation and Functioning and shall be immediately brought to the attention of the Governing Board by communicating the completed form in pdf format.
Art. 24. (1) If the reviewer has made comments to improve the material or to remedy any defects, one of the members of the Governing Board will forward the comments to the author at the e-mail address indicated with a request to comply within 15 days of communication.
(2) If material is substantially modified as a result of comments made by the reviewer, the Governing Board may exceptionally decide to have it re-evaluated by the original appointed scientific reviewer, who will supplement the original report with any new comments, if necessary.
Art. 241. The Governing Board may decide to combine the analysis provided for in subchapters 3.3 and 3.4 and have it carried out by a single person, in which case only the report provided for in Annex 7 to the Rules of Organisation and Functioning shall be drawn up, but the aspects of Article 55(1) of the Regulation.
Subchapter 3.5. Adoption of the final decision
Art. 25. (1) After going through the procedure laid down in Articles 8-24, the Editor-in-Chief or, as the case may be, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief shall present to the Governing Board the manner in which the procedure has been conducted, the observations and conclusions that have been formulated at each stage, and shall submit the material for publication in the pages of the Journal for a vote.
(2) If it has been decided to publish the material, the same decision shall also determine the Journal issue in which it will be published.
Art. 26. The decision shall be notified to the author within 5 days of its adoption.
Chapter 4. Final provisions
Art. 27. When appointing the person to the Editorial Board, Scientific Board or Scientific Reviewers, the Governing Board will consider:
- The designated person must have expertise in the field of analysis of the material submitted for publication;
- Maintaining a load balance so that deadlines set can be met;
- Preventing conflicts of interest;
- Knowledge of the language in which the material is written by the designated person;
- Obtaining high quality reviews that allow proper filtering of published material.
Art. 28. (1) At any time during the procedure, the Governing Board may decide to obtain a second opinion if it considers this necessary in order to maintain a high standard of quality with regard to published material.
(2) If the subject matter is beyond the competence and expertise of the members of the Editorial Board, the Scientific Board or the Scientific Reviewers, or if the appointment of such a person is not possible or would delay the evaluation process, the Governing Board may call upon persons from outside the Journal’s structure at any stage of the Journal. The decision to appoint these persons shall be taken by unanimous vote of the members of the Governing Board.
Art. 281. (1) Throughout the procedure the Governing Board will make sure that authors that submit materials for publication are not discriminated based on their sex, sexual orientation, political opinion, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, health status or any other criteria as such.
(2) When deciding to publish or not a material, the Governing Board shall also consider the need to promote the diversity of opinions but also to protect against any message that may cause sufferance and mental pain to a given group or promote the discrimination of such.
Art. 282. (1) Throughout the process of evaluation, the Governing Board will put in all the possible diligence to make sure that the best evaluation process is ensured and that only the materials which comply with the highest standard of scientific research are being published.
(2) If at any given time the Govering Boad discovers that a material which was already published breaches the rules of scientific research, urgent measures will be taken to redraw it from the Review.
Art. 29. (1) The Governing Board retains the discretionary right to decide on published material, but it shall not depart from the conclusions resulting from the review procedure except in exceptional circumstances and only to ensure that the objective set out in Article 3 of the Rules of Organisation and Functioning is achieved.
Art. 30. Throughout the review process the name and identification of the author will not be made known to any person involved in the process, except members of the Governing Board, and the name and identification of the reviewers will not be made known to the authors.
Art. 31. The evaluation sheets drawn up in the previous stages are not made known to subsequent reviewers.
Art. 32. These Regulations may be amended by unanimous vote of the members of the Governing Board.