Procesul de recenzare

Article Evaluation (Peer Review) Procedure

Materials submitted for publication undergo an anonymous and impartial selection procedure, which will be carried out within a maximum period of 30 days from their receipt. Authors will receive one of the following responses: the article is accepted, the article is accepted with certain modifications, or the article is rejected.

In evaluating the materials submitted to the editorial office, the reviewers, two in number, appointed from among the members of the Scientific Board according to their field of scientific expertise, will primarily consider the following criteria:

– whether the paper contains a minimum of 8,000 words (including the abstracts in the three languages, which together shall not exceed 1,000 words); – whether the subject of the article falls within the field of intellectual property law; – whether the paper has previously been published in other works or on other media; – whether the paper complies with the publication requirements established by the Scientific Board and the Editorial Board; – whether the paper contains an abstract providing sufficient information for readers to assess the results and conclusions of the research (maximum 300 words) and at least 6 keywords reflecting the essence of the paper, translated into two languages of wide international circulation (English and French); – whether the paper contains original scientific contributions of the author(s) and does not include erroneous data or information. At the same time, the quality of drafting and expression will also be assessed; – whether the legislation analyzed is in force; – whether bibliographical references are properly indicated in the footnotes; – whether the specialized literature is cited in accordance with the applicable standards; – whether the paper meets the scientific standards accepted by the Scientific Board; – whether the paper is of current interest and may contribute to the development of doctrine in the field; – whether the paper is accompanied by the author’s/authors’ details [academic title, academic rank, current place of employment, correspondence address (e-mail or postal)], as well as a telephone number; – whether the paper is accompanied by the Declaration of Authenticity and the consent regarding the processing of personal data, as well as the clause on the assignment of copyright for the purpose of publication in electronic and printed format.

If the submitted materials are improperly drafted, they will be returned to the author(s) prior to any evaluation/assessment of their content.

Following this initial assessment, all materials, with the exception of case law reports, will be evaluated by at least two reviewers specifically appointed from among the members of the Scientific Board, according to their field of scientific expertise, who do not know the name of the author(s) of the article(s).

Depending on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editorial Board will decide on the rejection, acceptance, or return of the manuscript with observations/suggestions for modification. In the latter case, the manuscript will be re-evaluated by another reviewer from among the members of the Scientific Board.

After acceptance of the manuscript subject to requested modifications, the author will be asked to submit the revised version including the changes made. If the author does not implement all the requested modifications, a note explaining this will be attached.

Materials considered unsuitable for publication following evaluation are not returnable, the author(s) being informed only of the acceptance or rejection for publication.

Conclusion: Following the peer review evaluation of the materials submitted for publication, the Editorial Board of the journal will deliberate on the reviewers’ observations/suggestions and the modifications made by the author(s), and will decide which articles will be published in the current issue of the journal, which will be postponed to a future edition, or which will be rejected for publication.