Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Sydney, 2004. / Title from title screen (viewed 5 May 2008). Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Faculty of Law. Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print form.

La Constitution du Royaume de Thaïlande de 2007 prévoit une refonte des juridictions administratives avec la séparation de la juridiction judiciaire afin d’assurer la protection des libertés du citoyen face à la puissance publique et de réparer les préjudices causés par l'administration. L’accès au prétoire du juge reste subordonné à un ensemble de règles procédurales. Toutefois, la simplicité des règles semble dominer à première vue, puisque suffit une demande écrite, sans l’obligation d’intervention d’un avocat. Ainsi, la procédure inquisitoire confère au juge l'initiative de la poursuite et la recherche des preuves incombe à l’administration.Dans un contexte marqué par un bouleversement des principes régissant l’accès au juge administratif, la question de l’accès au juge rencontre en pratique de nombreuses limitations issues de la multiplication des règles procédurales ainsi que de l’interprétation du juge. Tel est le cas, notamment, ainsi que le démontre cette thèse, des exigences relatives à la qualité, à la capacité à agir du requérant ou du « cercle de l’intérêt ». Cette mise en perspective des aspects fondamentaux et techniques du contentieux administratif thaïlandais a été influencée par des pays occidentaux, comme la France. Cette étude sur les dimensions théoriques et pratiques de l’accès au juge administratif en Thaïlande propose une réflexion sur la situation actuelle et future du contentieux administratif comme garant de l’État de droit. / The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand 2007 defines an overhaul of the administrative courts with the separated jurisdictions in order to protect the fundamental rights and freedom of all citizens against the misused of state power, to repair any damages caused by the administration, and to control the legality of administrative acts. Moreover, the regulations on how to bring the cases to courts are simplified into uncomplicated written form and can be conducted without a lawyer. Since in the inquisitorial system lets the judge to gather evidences as to conduct the investigations with the administration.However, there are some restrictions about bringing cases to courts which included the conditions of the applicant's abilities to act and "the circle of interest to sue". This perspective of the fundamental aspects of administrative lawsuit has been influenced by western countries, including France. This research study both the theoretical and practical dimensions on how to bring cases to administrative courts which reflect current and future situation through the analysis of the Thai and French administrative lawsuit systems.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2018-12-13T11:43:28Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Edson Antônio Sousa Pontes Pinto.pdf: 1981621 bytes, checksum: bc7bb8054d74f9d5b4b68138c6510ee1 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-12-13T11:43:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Edson Antônio Sousa Pontes Pinto.pdf: 1981621 bytes, checksum: bc7bb8054d74f9d5b4b68138c6510ee1 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-11-22 / The system of precedents established by the Civil Procedure Code bases on the need for integrity and stability of the legal system, as well as on the imperative guarantee of the uniqueness of the decisions set by the courts that have the competence to standardize the jurisprudence. The objective is to ensure that equal cases are treated in the same way, thus fulfilling the fundamental right of equality laid down in the Federal Constitution. That is, to apply precedents is to exercise the jurisdictional activity guided on the coherence of judgments, based on the arguments already established by the high courts, but above all is to bring rationality to the legal system and to the courts avoiding that these decisions be discarded, ignored or disrespected without any plausible reasoning, or reasons for it. Therefore, all those who have the power to judge, even if in an administrative jurisdiction, should adhere to and respect precedents established by the major courts, since they are bound to them by the constitutional principle of efficiency. This principle mandates that the Public Administration achieve the same purpose with the use of fewer resources, that is, applying this principle in judicial activity, the administrative judge must adhere to established precedents, considered public goods, avoiding that a thesis already judged and pacified is ignored or discarded without its due overruling. The present paper aims to demonstrate that the Tax Administrative Courts must follow precedents, because they are bound by Civil Procedure Code, but, above all, by a duty of efficiency, ordered by such principle, which dictates public agents and obliges them to act with rationality in administrative functions and activities, including here the judicial exercise of such courts / A sistemática de precedentes trazida pelo Código de Processo Civil fundamenta-se na necessidade de integridade e de estabilidade do sistema jurídico, bem como na imperiosa garantia de unicidade dos entendimentos firmados pelos tribunais que têm por competência uniformizar a jurisprudência, garantindo-se, assim, que casos iguais sejam tratados da mesma forma, concretizando, por conseguinte, o direito fundamental de igualdade previsto na Constituição Federal. Ou seja, aplicar precedentes é exercer a atividade jurisdicional pautado na coerência dos julgamentos, baseando-se nas teses já firmadas pelos tribunais de competência superior, mas, sobretudo, é trazer racionalidade ao sistema jurídico e aos órgãos judicantes, evitando-se que esses entendimentos pacificados sejam descartados, ignorados ou desrespeitados sem que haja fundamentação plausível ou motivos determinantes para tanto. Logo, todos aqueles que tem o poder-dever de julgar, mesmo que em sede administrativa, devem se pautar e respeitar os precedentes firmados pelas cortes maiores, visto que se encontram vinculados a eles pelo princípio constitucional da eficiência. Tal princípio ordena que a Administração Pública atinja o mesmo fim com a utilização de menos recursos, ou seja, trazendo à atividade jurisdicional, deve o julgador administrativo, por este princípio, aplicar os precedentes firmados, como bens públicos que são, evitando-se que uma tese já julgada e pacificada seja ignorada ou descartada sem a sua devida superação. O presente trabalho objetiva, portanto, demonstrar que os Tribunais Administrativos Tributários devem seguir precedentes, por estarem vinculados à sistemática do Código de Processo Civil, mas, acima de tudo, por um dever de eficiência, ordenado por tal princípio, que pauta os agentes públicos e os obriga a agir com racionalidade no trato das funções e das atividades administrativas, incluindo-se, aqui, o exercício jurisdicional desses tribunais

Thesis (M.Court.Mgmt.)--University of Wollongong, 2004. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references: leaf 272-287.

Univ., Diss. u.d.T.: Cavelti, Urs Peter: Die Verfahren vor dem Verwaltungsgericht des Kantons St. Gallen--Freiburg (Schweiz), 1993.

La question prioritaire de constitutionnalité constitue une véritable « révolution » en droit interne, tant au regard des institutions de l’ordre juridique français qu’au niveau de la protection constitutionnelle des droits fondamentaux des citoyens. Ce mécanisme novateur, permettant désormais au Conseil constitutionnel d’opérer un contrôle de constitutionnalité des lois a posteriori, ne peut toutefois fonctionner sans le concours des juridictions ordinaires qui s’érigent désormais en juges du filtre de la constitutionnalité. Or, en prenant le parti d’organiser une telle procédure, le constituant et le législateur organique ont invité officiellement le juge administratif à participer au contrôle de la constitutionnalité des lois. Au-delà de ce premier constat, que la thèse s’attache à étayer in concreto, l’entrée en vigueur de cette nouvelle voie de droit a entrainé une modernisation du droit tant au niveau juridictionnel qu’institutionnel. Celle-ci s’analyse comme la conséquence immédiate du processus de constitutionnalisation des diverses branches du droit qu’accroit de manière exponentielle l’utilisation quotidienne de la question prioritaire de constitutionnalité. Le droit du contentieux administratif, qui voit certaines de ses règles renouvelées sous l’effet de la nouvelle jurisprudence constitutionnelle affectant concomitamment l’office du juge administratif et plus globalement l’exercice de la justice administrative, montre que le juge administratif n’est pas seulement acteur de ce mécanisme mais aussi son sujet / The priority preliminary ruling on the issue of constitutionality is a real "revolution" in domestic law, both in terms of the institutions of the French legal system and at the level of constitutional protection of fundamental rights of citizens. This innovative mechanism, now allowing the Constitutional Council to reviewa posteriori the constitutionality of laws, however, can not function without the help of the ordinary courtswhich are now elevated as judges of the constitutional filter. Taking the party to organize such a procedure, the constituents and the legislator officially invited the administrative courts to participate in the review of the constitutionality of laws. Beyond this observation, which the thesis illustrates concretely, the entry in force of this new remedy has led to a modernization of the law both at the institutional and the jurisdictional levels.This is the immediate consequence of the process of constitutionalisation of the various branches of the law which the daily use of the priority question of constitutionality exponentially increases. The contentious rules before administrative courts, which are renewed under the influence of the new constitutional case law affecting simultaneously the powers of the administrative courts and more generally the exercise of administrative justice, shows the administrative courts are not only the participants of the process but also its subject matter

La thèse a pour objectif d’étudier l’ordre administratif : vers une réforme du système judiciaire en RDP Lao à travers l’étude d’identification des règles de droit administratif parmi les textes législatifs existants. La thèse est divisée en deux parties : Première partie : La création d’un droit administratif laotien. L’existence d’un droit administratif laotien est une hypothèse départ qui a permis d’évoquer le développement d’un droit autonome. Puis, les procédures actuelles de résolutions des litiges administratifs ont été étudiées sur la base du questionnaire qui avait été élaboré pour cette étude. Deuxième partie : Pour l’autonomie du droit administratif laotien par la mise en place d’une justice administrative. Il s’agit d’analyser les expériences des pays étrangers : France, Thaïlande et Vietnam sur la création de juridictions administratives. Le but est de connaître comment les juridictions administratives ont vu le jour dans ces pays d’une part et d’autre part d’examiner les caractéristiques celles-ci en tirant les bonnes leçons et expériences afin de proposer le modèle le plus adapté pour le Laos. / This thesis aims at researching the system of administrative justice towards the reform of judicial system in Lao PDR through a study of administrative rules among the existing legislative texts. This thesis consists of two parts: Part I: The creation of Lao administrative law. The existence of Lao administrative law is considered as the beginning hypothesis which was allowed us to identify the development of an autonomy law. Then the current administrative procedures of administrative dispute settlement were studied basing on the data bases gained from the questionnaire which had been prepared for this study. Part II: To ensure the autonomy of Lao administrative law by creating of the administrative court. It was to study and analyze the experiences of foreign countries: France, Thailand and Vietnam on the establishment of administrative courts. Its aim was to know, on the one hand, how the administrative courts have been establishing in these countries, and on the other hand, to identify the characteristics of these courts by gaining good lessons and experiences in order to propose the most suitable model for Laos.

Univ., Diss.--Basel, 2002.

Based on society's established norms, girls and boys are expected to behave differently. Certain behaviours are also differently accepted due to gender. This makes it possible to question if the principle of the best interests of the child in cases regarding The Compulsory Care of Young Persons Act (1990:52) (LVU), applies in the gender-neutral way that it's intended to do. To answer this, we have collected data through “collection of materials''. More specifically, we have used cases from a sample of administrative courts and courts of appeals which all deal with 3§ LVU. The data has been analysed through the method “qualitative content analysis” in which different patterns could be read out. The main conclusion of our study is that girls tend to be judged more harshly than boys. The courts assessments in girl cases/judgments includes factors that in boys cases/judgments goes unnoticed, like factors related to mental illness and self-harm. Another conclusion is that the principle creates space for many different interpretations which includes gender norms upon application of the 3§ LVU. When the principle is gender neutral, like it's intended to do, a discrimination because of sex can be hidden.

La perspective européenne a renouvelé l’intérêt de la question du maintien ou de la suppression du dualisme juridictionnel en France à travers deux approches : la résistance aux modèles concurrents d’organisation juridictionnelle d’une part, le crible des standards européens d’autre part. Considéré comme un modèle d’organisation juridictionnelle, le système français a inspiré la majorité des Etats européens. Le phénomène a néanmoins été temporaire. Désormais, la plupart des Etats européens ont un système d’organisation juridictionnelle qui se rattache à un autre modèle. Engager le système français dans une telle voie est juridiquement faisable mais peu opportun en pratique. Le système français en tant que modèle – quoique minoritaire – d’organisation juridictionnelle a donc vocation à perdurer. Sur un autre front, l’alignement du système français sur les standards européens a également fait émerger l’hypothèse de sa suppression. Les condamnations, réelles ou potentielles, de la juridiction administrative et du procès mené devant elle, ainsi que du Tribunal des conflits et de la procédure suivie devant lui, ont montré que les réformes étaient inévitables et imposé de revenir sur des pratiques séculaires bien établies. Elles ont également contribué à rapprocher la juridiction administrative de la juridiction judiciaire et le procès administratif du procès civil. « Sauvé » au prix de nombreuses transformations, le système n’en est pas moins parvenu à préserver ses caractéristiques essentielles, prouvant sa capacité d’adaptation. Un temps affaibli, le dualisme juridictionnel n’a, en définitive, pas été altéré. Mieux, son fondement technique, justification contemporaine du dualisme juridictionnel, en est sorti renforcé. / The European perspective has shed new light on the question of whether maintaining or ruling out jurisdictional dualism in France through two main approaches: on the one hand, the resilience of substitutable models and, on the other hand, the scrutiny of European standards. Considered as a model, the French system has inspired the majority of states in Europe. This wave of inspiration has nevertheless been short-lived. Indeed, most states in Europe have established a judicial system, which is different from the French model. Bringing the French system towards the one adopted by most states in Europe is juridically feasible but raises several issues in practice. As a result, the French system, albeit minor amongst the European states, is probably prone to live on. Furthermore, bringing the French system towards European standards raised the question of a likely end of it. In fact, the French system came under critics, whether effective or potential, of its administrative courts and legal proceedings, together with critics concerning its so-called “Tribunal des conflits” and the legal proceedings. These critics point to the fact that reforming the French system was inevitable. Such reforms led the French system back on some of its secular anchored practices. Eventually, reforms also contributed to bring closer both the administrative court and the administrative legal proceedings to both civil court and civil legal proceedings. Saved at the cost of numerous reforms, the French system nevertheless managed to preserve its basic structures. This in turn provides evidence that the French system is able to adapt itself to an evolving European environment. Finally, the technical founding principles of jurisdictional dualism have been reinforced.