No description available.

Since the 1970s there has been a growing interest in, and utilisation of, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques to resolve environmental conflicts in western societies. ADR was incorporated into one of New Zealand's main environmental statutes, the Resource Management Act 1991(RMA). Under s.268 of the RMA the Environment Court (the Court) may, if the parties agree, conduct mediation in order to facilitate settlement of resource management disputes. The RMA, which has now been in operation for ten years, gives no guidance as to the way in which mediation is to be conducted. The Court has developed procedures and processes for administering and conducting mediation. This study critically evaluates the practice of Court assisted mediation of environmental disputes under the RMA. A literature review and interviews with stakeholder groups are used in this evaluation. The study shows that mediation generates benefits for the Court and participants. It also identifies limitations with the current mediation procedures and processes. These may impact the effectiveness of participants in mediation, their satisfaction with, and support for, the mediated settlement and with the environmental outcomes. The study recommends a series of guidelines be prepared on the functions and administrative procedures of the Court and on the mediation process promoted by the Court. Further research is also recommended. It is considered that these recommendations, if implemented, will enhance the process for participants, ensure more equitable and consistent environmental outcomes, in terms of present and future generations, and retain public confidence in the mediation process.

La solha (« réconciliation » en arabe) est une méthode de résolution de conflits millénaire provenant du milieu tribal proche oriental. Bien au delà du simple règlement de litige, cette réconciliation vise à rétablir l’harmonie au sein des tissus sociaux déchirés. Habilitée à traiter toutes sortes de conflits, de la simple forme pénale aux cas criminels les plus complexes (cycles de vengeances et de vendetta), la solha s’est adaptée à des milieux très différents. La cause principale de son efficacité semble être l’universalité de ses principes fondamentaux (le pardon, la nécessité d’une réinsertion sociale du coupable, la satisfaction des victimes, etc.) ainsi que l’adéquation de ses rituels de réconciliation aux mœurs des populations qui la pratiquent. Ce mémoire cherche à approfondir notre compréhension de cette approche traditionnelle afin d’enrichir nos connaissances et moyens en termes de résolution de conflits contemporains. A cette fin, seront isolés les éléments fondamentaux qui font l’efficacité de cette méthode. Ceux-ci constitueront un modèle théorique minimal de la solha qui permettra d’entamer, à ce stade de l’étude, une réflexion quant à la possibilité de transposer de tels acquis à des milieux d’interventions nouveaux. / The sulha (“reconciliation” in Arabic) is a thousand years old conflict resolution method used in the near east tribal world. Far beyond a simple mediation, its objective is a solid reconstruction of the destroyed social network. Habilitated to deal with all kinds of conflicts, from simple penal cases to long lasting vendettas, the sulha process has proven its usefulness in very different social milieu. The most evident reason for this success has been its dual composition: fundamental principles that seem universal (forgiveness, social reinsertion of the guilty, satisfaction of the victims, etc.) and adaptive rituals that fit into people’s customs. This thesis seeks to enrich our knowledge and means in terms of conflict resolution by trying to reveal the mechanisms that make this method so efficient. The main objective is to compose a basic theoretical model of the sulha that would open a reflection about the possibility of transposing this model to new intervention contexts. / Avant-propos: La résolution de conflits s’est installée dans les cursus universitaires comme une discipline à part entière sinon comme une orientation au sein de plusieurs sciences sociales. En effet, ce champ d’étude fait de plus en plus l’objet de réflexions en sciences politiques, en sociologie, en anthropologie, etc, et ce, de par l’interdisciplinarité des questionnements qui en relèvent. Toutefois, la dimension religieuse, souvent considérée comme source de conflits, est quasi inexistante lorsqu’il est question d’approches de résolution. Nous nous proposons donc d’examiner la solha, une pratique proche orientale au sein de laquelle le fait religieux est une composante essentielle à la réconciliation escomptée. Note concernant la translittération: Les termes provenant de l’arabe feront l’objet d’une translittération phonétique basée sur le français. Notez que les translittérations en langue française sont différentes de celle en langue anglaise. Par exemple, le terme solha trouvera son équivalent anglais dans le terme sulha (d’où la différence d’orthographe entre le contenu de cette étude et les citations qui proviennent d’articles anglophones). De plus, notez que le genre (féminin, masculin) des termes translittérés reprendra celui de la langue d’origine, l’arabe. Ainsi, solha sera féminin, jaha aussi, etc… Finalement, pour des raisons de clarté, les termes translittérés seront tous en italique dans le texte.

本文目的在探討中國與美國股票市場的共移性。利用2005 年至2010 年的資料， 建立中國股票在紐約證券交易所的美國存託憑證投資組合及美國股票相對應產 業的投資組合，並計算它們二者間在日間以及夜間的報酬。這個分析結果顯示， 中國股市和美國股市會因為不同的市場資訊和影響規模，而有一定程度的相關性。 此外，透過建立二階段潛在變數模型，在文中進一步推論出競爭性衝擊是影響兩 國間股票市場共移性的主因。然而，市場對人民幣與美元匯率、美國國庫券利率 報酬變化的衝擊有落後效果。而此結果可以為國際投資組合的風險分散提供更細 部的訊息。 / This paper investigates stock market co-movements betweenthe the U.S. and China. We construct daytime and overnight returns for a portfolio of Chinese stocks using their NYSE-traded ADRs and an industry-matched portfolio of American stocks between 2005 and 2010. The results show that Chinese stock market is linked to American stock market through dierent sources and magnitudes of shocks. The analysis, based on the two-stage latent variables regression, further indicates that the market correlations be- tween China and the U.S. mostly come from competitive shocks. However, competitive shocks of the Yuan/Dollar foreign exchange rate and Treasury bill returns have lagged eects on the markets. The classications of shocks into competitive and global ones suggest a ner information for international risk diversication.

Since the 1970s there has been a growing interest in, and utilisation of, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques to resolve environmental conflicts in western societies. ADR was incorporated into one of New Zealand's main environmental statutes, the Resource Management Act 1991(RMA). Under s.268 of the RMA the Environment Court (the Court) may, if the parties agree, conduct mediation in order to facilitate settlement of resource management disputes. The RMA, which has now been in operation for ten years, gives no guidance as to the way in which mediation is to be conducted. The Court has developed procedures and processes for administering and conducting mediation. This study critically evaluates the practice of Court assisted mediation of environmental disputes under the RMA. A literature review and interviews with stakeholder groups are used in this evaluation. The study shows that mediation generates benefits for the Court and participants. It also identifies limitations with the current mediation procedures and processes. These may impact the effectiveness of participants in mediation, their satisfaction with, and support for, the mediated settlement and with the environmental outcomes. The study recommends a series of guidelines be prepared on the functions and administrative procedures of the Court and on the mediation process promoted by the Court. Further research is also recommended. It is considered that these recommendations, if implemented, will enhance the process for participants, ensure more equitable and consistent environmental outcomes, in terms of present and future generations, and retain public confidence in the mediation process.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-07T14:27:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 23757628 bytes, checksum: b79e1a17dd584c671b61d47956f6c726 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-04-11 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES / The practical experience of courses provided by Law Schools in Brazil shows that the legal education is not following the contemporary social transformations. On the other hand, the society is increasingly seeking for a more efficient, non-bureaucratical and speedier access to justice. However, this access is not being possible through traditional means of conflict resolution, what means lawsuits. Actually, the Judiciary seems inadequate in order to attend a constantly growing number of procedures and law professionals do not have awareness that we must privilege the pacification culture over the litigation culture. Therefore, due to so many crisis, either in Judiciary, in State, in the university legal education, it is necessary to find ways to provide practical and real effectiveness to make the access to justice as a citizen fundamental right, consequently, contributing to promote social, human and economic development in the democratic rule-of-law State. To achieve this objective, it must exist a join effort of society, legislators, legal scholars and students, in order to change the paradigm of a dogmatic and archaic legal education, which has its foundations in the history of a centralized and absolute Law, guided by utilization and application of what the laws dictate. This overpassed educational method, nowadays countered by several jurists, always withdrew the critical and interpretational power of the people, as it is evident in studies of the jurist theoretical common sense. Considering those aspects, this work aims to disseminate the phenomenon of extrajudicial conflict resolution as a new paradigm to be adopted for a legal education dedicated to alternative dispute resolution founded in negotiation techniques and game theory. / A experiência prática de disciplinas oferecidas nos cursos de direito das universidades federais brasileiras mostra que o ensino jurídico não está acompanhando as transformações sociais contemporâneas. Por sua vez, a sociedade vem buscando cada vez mais um acesso à justiça que seja célere, eficiente e desburocratizado. Todavia, esse acesso não tem sido possível através do meio tradicional de solução de conflitos, que é a prestação da tutela jurisdicional pelo Estado-juiz. Na verdade, o que se verifica é a insuficiência do Poder Judiciário para atender um número sempre crescente de demandas processuais e a falta de consciência dos operadores do direito de que é preciso privilegiar a cultura da pacificação, em detrimento da cultura da litigância. Assim, diante de tantas crises, seja do Poder Judiciário, seja do Estado, seja da educação jurídica universitária, faz-se necessário encontrar caminhos para que se dê efetividade prática e real de acesso à justiça como direito fundamental do cidadão, contribuindo, assim, para promover o desenvolvimento econômico, social e humano no Estado democrático de direito. Para que isso ocorra, é necessário um esforço conjunto da sociedade, dos legisladores, dos estudiosos do direito, dos docentes e discentes, no sentido de mudar um paradigma de educação jurídica dogmática e arcaica que tem suas origens na história de um direito centralizado e absoluto, disciplinado pela utilização e aplicação do que ditam as leis. Essa forma superada de educação, combatida atualmente por vários juristas, sempre tirou das pessoas o poder de interpretação e de crítica, consoante se evidencia nos estudos sobre o senso comum teórico do jurista. Levando em consideração esses aspectos, o presente trabalho tem por objetivo difundir o fenômeno da desjudicialização dos conflitos como um novo paradigma a ser adotado para uma educação jurídica que se volte para a prática da atividade advocatícia negocial, fundamentada por técnicas de negociação e pela teoria dos jogos.

O presente trabalho propôs-se a investigar a conveniência e a possibilidade de introdução, no ordenamento brasileiro, de iniciativas à semelhança dos pre-action protocols (Protocolos) e da Part 36 Offer (Oferta) do direito inglês, em vigor desde o advento das Civil Procedure Rules, em 1999. Aqueles, uma espécie de procedimento que se desenrola antes do processo judicial, incentivando o diálogo e a troca de informações e produção de prova entre as partes, cujo descumprimento importaria a incidência de multa; esta, uma oferta de acordo cuja rejeição ou aceitação traria consigo conseqüências patrimoniais às partes envolvidas na controvérsia, também representada pela aplicação de uma (outra) multa. Embora não indissociáveis, acredita-se que, juntos, potencializam-se mutuamente. Observaram-se os efeitos práticos da experiência inglesa, contemplando seus pontos fortes e fracos, chegando-se a um balanço positivo. Justificados os méritos dos institutos, entendeu-se possível a implantação de sistemática semelhante no Brasil, feitos certos ajustes. Observou-se, ainda, que um dos grandes méritos dos protocolos é a promoção do acordo informado, não do acordo motivado principalmente pela ineficiência e pela demora na prestação jurisdicional. Assim, propôs-se a elaboração de protocolos, preferindo-se os específicos ao genérico, incutindo na população e nos operadores do direito a cultura do diálogo e da cooperação na troca de informações. Observaram-se, ainda, os efeitos que a conduta das partes no desenrolar do protocolo geraria dentro do processo. Propôs-se, ainda, a introdução do que se chamaria de OPAc Oferta Potencializada de Acordo, à semelhança da Oferta inglesa, mas com conseqüências patrimoniais (multa) calculadas sobre a diferença apurada entre a OPAc e a condenação final, no processo, como forma de criar incentivos suficientes, mas não opressivos. / This paper seeks to investigate the desirability and the possibility of introducing, in the Brazilian law, initiatives such as the pre-action protocols (\"Protocols\") and Part 36 Offer (\"Offer\") of the English law, in force since the advent of the Civil Procedure Rules in 1999. The former, a kind of procedure that takes place before the judicial proceedings, encouraging the dialogue, the exchange of information and the disclosure of evidence between the parties, and which failure results in the application of a fine; the latter, a settlement offer which rejection or acceptance would entail financial consequences to the parties to the dispute, also represented by the application of a (another) fine. Although not inseparable, it is believed that, taken together, Protocols and Offer enhance each others effects. The analysis of the practical results of the British experience, considering its strengths and weaknesses, led to a positive balance. Once the merits of those mechanisms have been justified, the implementation in Brazil of a similar systematic provided certain adjustments are undertaken was considered possible. It was also observed that one of the great values of the Protocols is promoting well-informed agreements, instead of settlements mainly motivated by the inefficiency and delay of adjudication. Thus, the drafting of protocols was proposed, preferably the specific over the generic ones, introducing to the people as well as to the legal community a culture of dialogue and cooperation in the exchange of information and evidence. The effects that the conduct of the parties while following the Protocol would generate in the judicial proceedings were also analyzed. Moreover, we proposed the introduction of the so-called OPAc - Oferta Potencializada de Acordo (Enhanced Settlement Offer) - similar, in its concept, to the British Offer, albeit bearing financial consequences (fines) calculated over the difference between the OPAc and the amount as per the decision handed down by the judge, in order to create sufficient - but not oppressive - incentives.

Les modes de règlement des différends dans les contrats internationaux de construction est un sujet d’importance pratique inégalable car, en raison de leur complexité et des aléas auxquels ces contrats à long terme sont exposés, les différends sont une constante, depuis la conclusion du contrat jusqu’à l’achèvement des travaux. Par ailleurs, ces différends sont très variables, présentant chacun des caractéristiques propres. Face à cela, les parties cherchent à exécuter le contrat dans le délai et le prix contractés pour pouvoir utiliser l’ouvrage et retirer le profit espéré du contrat. Afin d’atteindre ce but, elles doivent donc régler ces différends de la manière la plus efficace possible pour éviter que ceux-ci ne viennent perturber l’exécution des travaux. Dans ce contexte, l’arbitrage, mode normal de règlement des litiges pour les contrats internationaux de construction, semble de plus en plus concurrencé par d’autres modes de règlement des différends. L’idée sous-jacente est que l’arbitrage ne serait pas adapté à tous les différends susceptibles de naître de ces contrats. Cependant, contrairement à cette idée de concurrence, la pratique a consacré, par le biais des clauses échelonnées, un système qui met en avant la complémentarité entre les différents mécanismes. L’objectif est que ce système soit adapté à régler efficacement le plus grand nombre de différends possible. L’objet de cette thèse est de faire le point sur les raisons de la consécration du système échelonné, ainsi que sur les difficultés de sa mise en oeuvre, que ce soit dans sa phase pré-juridictionnelle, juridictionnelle ou dans la relation entre les deux. / The Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in International Construction Contracts is a subject of paramount practical importance. In light of their complexity, and the unforeseeable circumstances to which these long term contracts are exposed, disputes are a constant factor, from the signature of the contract to the completion of works. Furthermore, these disputes are very diverse, each one presenting its own set of characteristics. Facing these issues are the parties, who wish to complete the project within the time and price agreed, in order to be put it to use and make the expected profit. To achieve this goal, the parties need to resolve their disputes in the most efficient manner possible, preventing disputes from disrupting the execution of works. In this regard, arbitration, that has been for a long time the predominant method for settling disputes in international construction contracts, would seem to be suffering from the concurrence of other dispute resolution mechanisms. The underlying reason is that arbitration would not be adapted to all types of disputes that could arise from these contracts. However, contrary to this idea of concurrence, the industry has established, via multi-tiered clauses, a system that puts forward and interplay between the different dispute resolution mechanisms. The purpose of this system is to be flexible to adapt and efficiently resolve the largest potential number of disputes. The objective of this thesis is to give a comprehensive analysis of the reasons for the rise of the multi-tiered system, as well as of the difficulties of its practical application, may that be with respect to the pre-jurisdictional phase, jurisdictional phase, or the relationship between both.

The task this master’s thesis was evaluated present status safety management system for transport of materials and dangerous substances. I looks this issues like whole in The theoretical part. I want to find all kritical locations. I analysis type of transport, transport routs, driver training, legislation and label the most transport of materials and dangerous substances. I want to found the risk to remove or cushion. I want to proposed preventive measures in the practical part.

Les processus de résolution amiable des différends – conciliation, médiation, procédure participative ou droit collaboratif – présentent une unité d’objectif. Leur mise en œuvre permet une tentative de conclusion d’un accord amiable : un contrat consacrant la solution du différend construite par les parties. Sans se départir d’une approche procédurale, cette étude propose une analyse contractuelle de la résolution amiable des différends. Au-delà d’une procéduralisation de la formation de l’accord amiable, le droit commun des contrats sert en effet de manière unitaire les négociations et la conclusion de l’accord amiable. Ce dernier présente néanmoins une certaine diversité au regard des qualifications contractuelles qu’il peut revêtir. Si le contrat de transaction apparaît comme un référent à l’accord amiable, tout accord amiable ne consiste pas nécessairement en une transaction. Mais au-delà du jeu des qualifications possibles, le droit commun des contrats fédère les conditions de validité et les forces de l’accord amiable. Une unité fondamentale des accords amiables se révèle ainsi, garantissant la résolution effective des différends / The amicable settlement process - conciliation, mediation, collaborative procedure or law - present the same aim. Every amicable settlement process permits the conclusion of an amicable agreement: a contract consecrating the solution built by the parties. Without distracting from procedural approach, this study offers a contractual analysis of the amicable dispute resolution. Beyond a proceduralisation of the negotiation and the amicable settlement formation, it is the general law of contract that insure a support to the amicable settlement process. However, the amicable settlement presents some diversity due to peripheral qualifications. If the transaction contract is a reference to the amicable settlement, every amicable settlement is not necessarily a transaction. Beyong the choice of qualifications, the general contract law unites the validity conditions and the forces of the amicable settlement. A fundamental unity of amicable settlements reveals, safeguarded the effective dispute resolution