A tese apresenta modelo de classificação de ações judiciais categorias e de ressignificação escalas da decisão judicial em categoria dicotômica (Liberal e Garantista), calcada em modelo teórico de definição da direção do resultado judicial institucional (decisão) e individual (voto) . Testa o modelo em face de decisões do STF no período de 1988 e 1989, em sede de controle de constitucionalidade (ADI). Apresenta as inferências extraíveis dos dados quantitativos, sob 03 perspectivas fidelidade, álibi e traição. / This research presents model and methodology for classifying judicial cases, according to categories, and its opinions, through scales, in two behavioral patterns (Liberal and Garantista), which summarize the decision and vote directions. The model is tested against a specific set of STFs judicial opinions from 1988 and 1989 (direct judicial review). Possible inferences are extracted from the quantitative results produced, using a threefold perspective, labeled as faithfulness, alibi and treason. Concludes that the model can be used by different analytic models, such as Legal, Attitudinal and Formal Theory.

A hipótese do trabalho é a de que o Supremo Tribunal Federal utiliza argumentos consequencialistas para admitir e julgar o controle de constitucionalidade de leis e normas orçamentárias. A tese é dividida em duas partes. Na primeira são tratados os temas que fundam a análise argumentativa das decisões judiciais. A argumentação jurídica é proposta como lente de exame das decisões judiciais, especialmente o ramo da retórica. De acordo com esse referencial teórico, os tribunais e juízes buscam convencer o auditório de que produzem a decisão mais adequada possível. É ressaltada a importância do argumento na formação do precedente, no que há de fundamental nas decisões (ratio decidendi) e no que é periférico (obiter dictum). O argumento consequencialista é visto diante de diversas teorias que o propõem, como o utilitarismo e o pragmatismo, com destaque, em capítulo próprio, para a teoria de Neil MacCormick, que propõe um consequencialismo essencialmente jurídico. Em sua segunda parte, a tese explora os temas que levarão às conclusões da hipótese. Em primeiro lugar, as características marcantes da produção de leis e normas orçamentárias, sua natureza jurídica e seu fundamento de validade. É revisto o controle de constitucionalidade dessas normas no ordenamento brasileiro, sendo pontuadas as particularidades e limites pertinentes ao seu controle principal. E por fim, no último capítulo, são analisadas pormenorizadamente as decisões que o Supremo Tribunal Federal produziu no controle principal de leis e normas orçamentárias, demarcando a presença de argumentos consequencialistas e buscando estabelecer quais são os precedentes vigentes no direito brasileiro. Ao fim, conclui-se que o controle de constitucionalidade principal é a via mais adequada nas matérias orçamentárias; que o precedente estabelecido no Supremo Tribunal Federal é o de possibilidade de controle de constitucionalidade principal de normas orçamentárias por ADI e ADO, não por ADPF; e que o tribunal usa adequadamente, na maioria das vezes, os argumentos consequencialistas, porquanto estes predominam (ratio decidendi) nas decisões mais importantes sobre a matéria. / The hypothesis of this work is that the Supreme Court uses consequentialist arguments to admit the judicial review of budgetary laws. The thesis is divided in two parts. In the first, the themes that underlie the argumentative analysis of judicial decisions are discussed. Legal argumentation is proposed as a lens for examining decisions, especially rhetoric. According to this theoretical framework, the courts and judges seek to convince the audience that they produce the most appropriate decisions possible. It highlights the significance of the argument in shaping the precedent, in what is crucial in decisions (ratio decidendi), and what is peripheral (obiter dictum). The consequentialist argument is analyzed according to the various theories that underlie it, such as utilitarianism and pragmatism, especially, in a separate chapter, according to Neil MacCormicks theory, that offers an essentially legal consequentialism. In its second part, the thesis explores the issues that lead to the conclusions of the hypothesis. Firstly, the salient features of the production of budget laws, its legal status and fundament of validity. The judicial review of these laws in the Brazilian legal system is revised, and the limits and particularities of its main control are punctuated. And finally, in the last chapter, the decisions produced by the Supreme Court in the main judicial review of budgetary laws are minutely explored, the existence of consequentialist arguments is indicated, and it seeks to establish the precedents existing in Brazilian law. It concludes, lastly, that the abstract judicial review is the most suitable option in budget matters; that the precedent set in the Supreme Court is about the possibility of the abstract judicial review of budgetary laws by ADI and ADO, but not ADPF; and that the court properly uses, most often, consequentialist arguments, and they predominate (ratio decidendi) in the most important decisions about it.

Le droit français a développé une politique législative et jurisprudentielle largement favorable à l’arbitrage dans tous ses aspects, notamment relativement à l’exécution d’une sentence arbitrale. La dernière réforme majeure du droit français de l’arbitrage a été adoptée en 2011. Dans le contexte de l’harmonisation mondiale du droit et de la pratique de l’arbitrage, la Convention de New York, destinée à faciliter la reconnaissance et l’exécution des sentences étrangères, a simplifié considérablement l’exécution de celles-ci. Néanmoins, l’exécution des sentences internationales est soumise à un contrôle judiciaire du tribunal étatique qui doit être en conformité avec son propre droit. Ainsi, dans la pratique, l’application du régime juridique peut largement varier d’un pays à l’autre. Une étude sur la Chine est un bon exemple dans ce contexte, puisque ses règlements d’arbitrage ont fait l’objet de réformes annuelles successives. À l’inverse des critiques concernant l’exécution des sentences étrangères sur le territoire chinois de la part des investisseurs et des auteurs étrangers, la doctrine et les rapports des chercheurs chinois se montrent plus positifs. L’objectif de cette thèse est d’offrir aux praticiens une vision claire et une image objective de la question d’exécution des sentences arbitrales en Chine. Elle est basée sur des analyses théoriques du régime juridique, des statistiques et de la pratique des tribunaux et présente l’état actuel du droit de l’arbitrage en Chine à travers une étude comparative (incluant Hong Kong et Taïwan). Dans ce vaste contexte social chinois, nous essayons de comprendre l’histoire, la pratique actuelle, les obstacles juridiques, les positions judiciaires et les perspectives de l’exécution des sentences arbitrales étrangères en Chine. Nous espérons que la prochaine réforme du droit de l’arbitrage en Chine trouvera inspiration dans la récente réforme du droit Français. / France revealed its long-awaited new arbitration law in January 2011. France had forged a legal and judicial framework that is significantly favorable to arbitration in every respect, particularly in the field of enforcement arbitral award. In the context of harmonisation of arbitration law and practice worldwide, the central purpose of the New York Convention was to facilitate the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. It considerably simplifies the enforcement of foreign awards. Nonetheless, the enforcement of an international arbitral award always takes place through a national court operating under its own legislations. In practice, the application of this legal regime can vary significantly from one country to another. China provides a good case study on this background, its arbitration rules has gone through continuous process of reform every year. While the foreign investors and researchers have often claimed that enforcement in China is problematic, the Chinese authors and researchers present a more positive view. The aim of this research endeavours to present a unique insight and an objective picture of the enforcement of arbitral awards in China, based on a combination of theoretical analysis of legal regime, statistical information and practical insights. It explains the current arbitration law in China with a comparative approach (including Hong Kong and Taiwan). Setting Chinese arbitration in its wider social context, we try to understand the history, the contemporary practice, the legal obstacles, the judicial attitudes and the possible future trends in the field of enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. We hope that the recent French Arbitration Law would be an inspiration for the next reform of the PRC Arbitration Law.

The Enforcement of EU Competition Law and Its Compliance with the Right to Fair Trial - the Abstract: The EU is a community based on common values among which the prime role is played by fundamental rights. One of the most important rights which serves also as a vehicle for the protection of other rights is the right to fair trial. That is valid also for the specific field of EU competition law. The European Commission issues in competition proceedings sanctions which are of criminal nature. Such sanction must be either imposed or at least reviewed by an independent court or tribunal with a full jurisdiction. This is a doctrine developed by the ECtHR in Strasbourg under art. 6 of the Convention and it has been well established in its case law for decades. Since the Commission itself is not an independent court or tribunal, its decisions must be reviewed by the ECJ which must exercise the full jurisdiction over the decisions in question. In the past the ECJ was criticised that it did not possess or exercise the full jurisdiction by which it failed to safeguard the standard of fair trial. Although the ECJ accepted the line of case law on criminal nature of Commission's decisions, at times it was indeed rather hesitant to review fully the parts of the decision where the Commission assessed the factual...

(abstrakt v anglickém jazyce) The main contents of this dissertation (diploma paper) is a study of jurisdiction of The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic and of The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany and their comparison. The first part of this work describes in brief the genesis of the constitutional jurisdiction and its two basic types. Afterwards there is characterized the constitutional jurisdiction in Germany and in the Czech Republic and next there is described legal regulation and organisation of the German and Czech constitutional courts. Further I deal with the jurisdiction of constitutional courts (of european continental type) in general. In the second part of this work, first I give a general idea about jurisdiction of the German and Czech constitutional courts. After it I already deal with analysis of their single, selected competences - in the concrete: regulation control (judicial review), constitutional complaint, judicial review of international conventions and questions of jurisdiction. I have not focused on the other competences, which the both constitutional courts dispose of. Firstly there is no need to analyse them for the sake of insight into the problem, secondly there should be kept adequate range of this work. The third part results from the analysis of the...

Le 23 juillet 2008, le Constituant français a créé la question prioritaire de constitutionnalité. Cette nouvelle procédure permet au Conseil constitutionnel d’être saisi, sur renvoi de la Cour de cassation ou du Conseil d’Etat, de la constitutionnalité d’une disposition législative. La création de cette nouvelle voie de droit est de nature à bouleverser les rapports qui se sont établis entre les ordres de juridiction constitutionnel,administratif et judiciaire. L’objet de la présente consiste en une analyse des relations qui existent entre ces trois ordres de juridiction dans le cadre de l’exercice de la fonction juridictionnelle et a pour objet de mesurer l’impact de la création de la question prioritaire de constitutionnalité sur les relations systémiques qui sont présentes entre ces trois juges. / On 2008, july 23 was created the “question prioritaire de constitutionnalité”.This new procedure allows the Constitutional Council to be seized, on remand from the administrative and judicial Supremes Courts, the constitutionality of a law. The creation of this new remedy is likely to upset the relationships that are established between levels of constitutional jurisdiction, administrative and judicial. This thesis is an analysis of the relationships between these three types of courts in the context of the exercise of the judicial function and measure the impact of the creation of the« question prioritaire de constitutionnalité » is to systemic relationships that are present between the three judges

This thesis analyses the administrative justice system, which represents one of the key control mechanisms of the public administration in The Czech Republic. The aim of this thesis is to compare the administrative justice system of The Czech Republic with selected European models of the administrative justice system such as the French and German justice systems. The result of this comparison highlights the differences in justice systems and considers the possibility of implementing these models in The Czech legal system.The administrative justice system in The Czech Republic has been developing since 2003, when The Act N. 150/2002 came into effect. The operating administrative justice system in The Czech Republic is characterized by the following criteria: statutory framework, power and jurisdiction of the administrative court, organization of the administrative justice system and the course of the judicial administrative proceedings. The following chapters discuss the French and German models of the administrative justice system and analyze the similarities with the Czech system.The final chapter compares the individual administrative justice systems and their most important differences.

Principles of administrative proceedings, abstract Focus of this diploma thesis is the issue of basic principles of administrative proceedings, but not in terms of basic procedure principles of administrative authorities as they are set out in § 2 to 8 of the Administrative Procedure Code, but in terms of procedural principles of administrative proceedings, as rules of procedure before administrative authorities. These principles represent a key element for understanding and interpretation of the procedural process in an administrative proceeding, but Administrative Procedure Code does not contain an express codification of these principles in its text. Goal of this thesis is to perform a detailed analysis of individual principles both individually and in context. The aforementioned principles of administrative proceedings usually occur in the form of mutually ambivalent pairs and their application during administrative proceedings presents many conflicting issues which stems from their implicitly general nature. The methodological basis of this thesis is the method of textual hermeneutics and general empirical-analytical paradigm based on the source material, which consists mainly of judgments and resolutions of the Supreme Administrative Court and is supplemented by relevant literature. The text of this...

Le droit de la concurrence connaît une évolution fondamentale. Le contentieux prouve incontestablement que le débat initial sur l’existence d’une infraction a été remplacé par celui sur l’amende. Or, au centre du débat sur l’amende, se trouve la pleine juridiction du juge de l’Union sur les décisions de la Commission européenne infligeant une amende. En droit de l’Union, cette compétence est donnée au juge dans le droit primaire, par l’article 261 TFUE et dans le droit dérivé, par l’article 31 du règlement n°1/2003. Le juge peut supprimer, réduire ou majorer l’amende infligée. D’un côté, les pouvoirs conférés au juge par les textes sont vastes, ce qui laisse place à une jurisprudence imprécise, qui divise, tant à propos des conditions que de l’exercice de la pleine juridiction. D’un autre côté, alors qu’en droit de l’Union, la pleine juridiction renvoie à une compétence du juge sur le montant de l’amende, en droit du Conseil de l’Europe, la pleine juridiction correspond à un standard de contrôle qu’exerce le juge sur la décision adoptée. La question qui innerve cette étude reste celle de savoir si, en droit de l’Union, la compétence de pleine juridiction exercée par le juge satisfait-il au standard de contrôle de pleine juridiction, au sens de la Convention ? C’est, d’une part, le constat que la pleine juridiction, en droit de l’Union, souffre d’une conception désormais faussée. D’autre part, parce que la jurisprudence n’est pas uniforme, c’est une application dynamique de la pleine juridiction qui est encouragée, à travers un modèle de solutions pratiques applicable de manière systématique, dans un but de plus de cohérence et de sécurité juridique / EU competition law has fundamentally changed. The developments in competition litigation prove clearly that the initial debate about breaches of substantive competition law has now been replaced by a debate over the fine. The EU courts’ unlimited jurisdiction is now central to the debate over fines. In EU law, unlimited jurisdiction of the Court of justice regarding the penalties is granted by article 261, TFEU and by article 31, regulation no1/2003. On one hand, the powers granted to the EU courts are broad and vague. Which means unlimited jurisdiction results from a case-law construction of an evolutive and open nature. On the other hand, under human rights law, unlimited jurisdiction is a standard of control while under EU law, unlimited jurisdiction is merely a competence over the level of the fine. Therefore, the underlying question remains whether the judicial review in EU law does comply with the criteria of unlimited jurisdiction as established by the ECtHr? The objective of this study is to bring light to the fact that the definition of unlimited jurisdiction in EU law is blurred based on the misapprehension of its nature and more importantly, given the conflicting case law in this matter, we would like to promote a dynamic approach of the EU courts’ unlimited jurisdiction through practical solutions in a systematic perspective in the interests of legal certainty and judicial coherence

1 Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland Abstract The aim of this thesis is to outline the position of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland in the Swiss legal system and to discuss whether an extension of the judicial review on federal statutes should de lege ferenda take place. The first chapter serves as a brief description of the formation of Switzerland as well as of the Federal Supreme Court itself. The second chapter deals with the position of the Federal Supreme Court in the Swiss legal system along with its internal organisation. The third chapter is dedicated to the various types of constitutional jurisdiction from a theoretical point of view. The fourth chapter's purpose is to offer an overview of the current legal framework of constitutional jurisdiction in Switzerland. The fifth chapter acts as an evaluation of the various arguments for and against the implementation of judicial review of federal statutes. The Swiss legal system is generally very well known for its uniqueness and emphasis on the principle of sovereignty of the people. Although it is often used as an example of a well functioning democracy, there are parts of it that can be subject to critical dispute. Key words: Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, swiss legal system, judicial review