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

Les arguments du mouvement Critical Legal Studies sur l’indétermination du droit ne sont doublés d’aucune théorie sur la légitimité des interprétations qu’offrent les juges et donc d’aucun critère juridique pour critiquer une décision. La théorie pluraliste critique du droit, qui prend acte de la pluralité du droit officiel pour redéfinir le phénomène juridique plutôt que de nier qu’il puisse exister, pourrait toutefois fournir un tel critère. En effet, elle présente plusieurs correspondances avec les travaux de Dworkin, qui défend que les citoyens sont en droit d’obtenir les fruits d’une attitude interprétative en germe dans le concept même de droit. Ces deux théories maintiennent que le droit sert à reconnaître la valeur de l’histoire d’un groupe dans sa conception de lui-même tout en soutenant qu’il doit trouver une pertinence contemporaine pour être effectif et légitime. Les pluralistes priorisent toutefois la résonance actuelle des règles de droit et croient que toute communauté est divisée entre diverses définitions du bien. Selon eux, le droit est avant tout un procédé pour penser la conduite humaine et lui conférer un sens, qui dépend des capacités créatrices des citoyens. Chaque règle est alors la cause d’une pluralité d’ordres juridiques concurrents. Suivant ce portrait, seule l’acceptation d’une interprétation par un groupe, sa capacité à lui reconnaître un sens, pourrait rendre cette interprétation légitime. Ce critère nous mène vers un modèle de justice négociée où deux personnes s’adressent à un juge pour développer une lecture en commun du droit, pour identifier une interprétation légitime dans leurs univers juridiques respectifs. / No theory of the legitimacy of judges accompanies the Critical Legal Studies’ arguments on the indeterminacy of law, which entails there are no criteria to identify a legitimate interpretation. Critical legal pluralism, which redefines law to take account of its inherent plurality rather than denying its very possibility on these grounds, could however provide such criteria. Indeed, it presents many resemblances with Dworkin’s theory of law which argues that citizens are entitled to reap the benefits of the interpretative nature of law. Both theories defend that law allows to bridge a group’s past, which is essential to its self-understanding, with the present, and both insist that law must be made to appear relevant in the present. Pluralists however prioritize the current significance of law and stress that communities are split by a variety of definitions of the good. According to them, law is mainly a process to think about human conduct and grant it meaning, and it depends as such on citizens’ creative capacities. Accordingly, only an interpretation that is accepted by a group and seen as meaningful can be considered legitimate. This criterion forces us to consider a form of negotiated justice, where two persons consult a judge to develop a common reading of a rule which would be legitimate in each person’s legal universe.

(in English): This diploma thesis deals with the issue of alternative dispute resolution, mediation in non- criminal matters. The mediation is estabilished in the Act on Mediation and amending certain other acts (the Act on Mediation) No. 202/2012 Coll. in the Legal Order of the Czech Republic, that is the main the aspect in this thesis. This actual topic, (the issue is that it is relatively a new law, which came into effect in September 2012), deals with the personality and educational attainment of registered mediators, particulary prerequisite for the performance of the profession of a registered mediator due to the mentioned law and it examines and compares effeciency in the mediators' exams in the Czech Bar Association and the Ministry of Justice of the Czech Republic according to the Ordinance No. 277/2012 Coll., about the trials and rewards of mediator. The main goal of this diploma thesis is to find out by means of quantitative research if there is a difference between registered mediators with different previous university education and how it shows in mediation process. The teoretical part of the diploma thesis is devoted to description of the mediation as an alternative dispute resolution, defining the role and duties of mediators and the system of education of mediators.

In today’s world, people from various cultures interact on a daily basis on a number of occasions. During these intercultural encounters, conflicts often arise. Intercessors are needed to help people navigate these types of disagreements. Mediators are considered some of these peacekeepers. This thesis engaged with mediators at a mediation center in the Midwestern United States in order to understand what strategies seemed most effective. I examined the research that scholars have conducted regarding building rapport through utilizing respect and face issues, as well as nonverbal behavior. In addition, I explored the connection between the understanding of these factors and intercultural competence and intercultural conflict competence. The purpose of this thesis was to see how these mediators understood and valued respect and face issues, including nonverbal behavior, when building rapport with parties in mediations. These mediators were engaged in two manners, via survey and interview questions. The intercultural competence of the mediators in these domains was also explored. The results of the research in this thesis showed how the mediators were skilled in some areas, such as in rapport building and respect issues. It further revealed that they were in need of some skills for their toolbox, such as training on face issues and nonverbal behavior, including silence, tone of voice, and eye contact. Detailed recommendations for the mediators are provided. Future research is encouraged: A group of mediators that have exhibited intercultural competence should be selected in order to test their intercultural conflict competence.

我國著作權集體管理團體發展至今，僅存五家集管團體，無論是會員數或業務總額皆與國外規模相距甚遠，難以有效達成降低授權成本、使著作充分流通利用與保障著作權的功用。追根究柢原因在於：無法從使用報酬費率的制訂過程中，取得利用人與集管團體間的共識。 隨著數位技術的演進，著作權利用方式與型態日趨多元，立法者的觀點卻趕不上時代的變化，倘若爭議處理方式仍僅限於規範的抽象內容探討與適用，往往難以得到當事人欲求的結果。Teubner認為現今複雜分歧的社會需要一個去中心化的社會整合機制，將傳統法律的管制負擔轉移至其他社會體系；法律只有在為其他社會次級體系的反思過程提供結構性前提時，才能實現其自身的反思取向，發揮反思法的社會整合功能。因此，若能開展調解、仲裁等訴訟外爭議解決機制，除了即時有效解決紛爭，避免法院訟累，並能於協調過程中充分揭露資訊，使當事人間贏得互信，不失為一種發展反思性程序的可能。 本文從Teubner反思法的角度觀察，輔以中國、日本、美國、德國的著作權集體管理制度之立法例與實踐概況，作整體歸納分析，從中擷取出具有反思理性特徵做比較評析。最後，透過反思法理論所提出當今法律演化的特徵，對於我國將來建構良善的集體管理團體制度，提供一些不同的思考觀點。 / In the diversity of social economics activities, recent developments in the evolution of neighboring rightsand reflects the change of publication displaying methods due to technology.Such development may create inner conflict and endanger the law system. If people explore the reason of conflict and disposal process just at the point of normative abstract content and applicable, it will always be unable to gain the ideal result. Collective management organizations(CMOs) is an important indicator of copyright protection. CMOs’ operation reduces the licensing costs, promotes the legal exploitation of works, achieves broad public access of copyrighted works, and protects the benefits of copyright owners. Indeed, a reasonable royalty rate is the core for the successful operation of CMOs. Thisstudy isfrom the view ofTeubner's Theory of Reflexive Law, to observe the substantial social effectiveness of copyright collective management under the control of law and providing the structural premises for reflexive processes in other social subsystems.According to the characteristic of reflexive law,this thesis aimed to introducea new tendency to settle collective management of copyright.

Cette étude présente une caractérisation du mécanisme procédural de l'intervention des tiers en droit judiciaire privé québécois. Développée en trois volets, elle aborde successivement l'origine historique de l'intervention des tiers, qui révèle sa pérennité et sa longévité (première partie). Un modèle conceptuel de sa forme contemporaine selon lequel son bien-fondé repose sur sa légitimité et son utilité est proposé (deuxième partie). Enfin, une étude critique, dans une perspective sociologique et comparative, de la place de l'intervention des tiers dans les projets de réforme de la procédure civile, expose son incompatibilité avec les modes alternatifs de résolution des conflits et trouve, dans le pouvoir judiciaire de l'ordonner d'office présent la législation étrangère, une assurance contre l'iniquité à laquelle le droit québécois devrait souscrire (troisième partie). / This study is a characterization of the procedural mechanism allowing intervention or joinder of third parties in Quebec's civil procedure law. Consisting of three parts, it traces the history of this procedure, revealing its perennial longevity (Part one). A theory of its contemporary function is proposed, according to which its legal validity rests on its legitimacy and usefulness (Part two). Finally, the place of third party intervention in civil procedure law reform is analysed from a sociological and comparative standpoint, exposing its fundamental incompatibility with ADR (Alternative dispute resolution) and finding that the judicial power–in foreign law–to order intervention as of right is a safegard against unfairness worth incorporating into Quebec's procedural law (Part three).

Inscrits dans le contexte actuel de mondialisation, le développement et la promotion remarqués des modes amiables de règlement des différends (MARD) témoignent d’une nouvelle appréhension de la production normative où le justiciable est placé au cœur du droit, l’entente se substitue à l’autorité, la discussion et le dialogue prévalent. Tandis que le temps économique ne semble plus cadrer avec le temps judiciaire dans ce contexte concurrentiel qui exige des réactions rapides, les MARD répondent à une demande concrète des entreprises. Placées au centre de ce processus vivant et complexe, les entreprises adaptent leur stratégie de gestion des conflits en faisant appel à des moyens qui servent le mieux leurs intérêts. La prévention des risques est une priorité, la gestion de l’aléa, un défi quotidien et l’adaptation au contexte évolutif à l’espace et au temps, la marque de l’efficience des instruments normatifs adoptés. Les MARD laissent ainsi entrevoir la résurgence de la question de la légitimité du droit et de la justice étatique. On a qualifié ce phénomène de justice douce mais s’agit-il d’une forme de justice fut-elle alternative ? La réponse à cette question dépend de la compréhension globale que nous avons de ce phénomène. Cette réflexion se propose ainsi de le définir bien plus que comme la seule mise en œuvre de modes consensuels de traitement des différends, mais, véritablement comme l’expression d’un ordre juridique en développement. Approuvé par ses principaux usagers, les MARD deviennent un outil efficace de justice équitable. La notion de justice est alors envisagée, non pas dans son sens organique, mais substantiel, la justice pouvant être aussi consensuelle. / As part of the current context of globalisation, the development and promotion of the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) clearly show a new approach in the production of norms, whereby the litigant is positioned at the very heart of the rule of law, and where mutual understanding replaces authority, and discussion and dialogue prevail. While economic time no longer correlates with judicial time in the competitive framework, which by its very nature demands rapid reactions, the ADR process meets concrete corporate needs. At the core of this active and complex process of globalisation, corporations adapt their conflict management strategies through ways which best serve their interests. Risk prevention is a priority, risk management a daily challenge and the adaptation to the evolving context, in space and time, the sign of efficiency of the normative tools used. Thus, ADR and its involvement in the globalisation process, raises anew the issue of the legitimacy of law and court justice. This phenomenon has been qualified as negotiated or consensual justice, but is it at its core a form of justice, even an alternative one? The answer to this question mainly depends on the overall understanding of the ADR phenomenon. That is why this thesis proposes to view it as more than just a simple implementation of a consensual dispute resolution tool as it is often depicted, but more genuinely as the expression of a developing legal order. Approved by its main users, the ADR process has become an instrument of fair and effective justice and has captured the concept of justice in its essence rather than in its structure.

Cette thèse doctorale a pour objet l’étude et en particulier l’influence qu’a pu avoir, et qu’ont toujours, les puissances européennes sur la résolution des conflits en Afrique de l’Ouest et ainsi déterminer s'il existe une culture juridique « africaine ». / This thesis is devoted to the study the influence of the European powers on past and present dispute resolution in West African legal systems and thereby to determine whether an "African legal culture" exists.

Medical negligence is a growing concern within South Africa.1 The medical environment has great potential for conflict, because even the best trained physicians can commit errors that result in medical disabilities and sometimes in death.2 The conflicts that follow from these errors are mostly fuelled by emotions and they can become very expensive and time-consuming to settle using the litigation process.3 There is a growing recognition that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems in healthcare may alleviate some of the financial and psychological burdens on doctors and patients involved in medical negligence disputes. Mediation is a method of ADR that is flexible and it permits the parties to the dispute to have control over the resolution. A typical medical negligence dispute is driven by intensely emotional factors on the part of injured patients. Victims are not merely seeking financial compensation but they are also looking to understand the circumstances that brought on the event at hand. They want closure. A huge issue with regard to medical negligence litigation is the manner in which the claims are resolved. Litigation provides injured patients and caregivers with a traditional platform for addressing medical negligence claims. However, due to many reasons, this system seems not to be adequate for dealing with disputes arising from alleged medical negligence. Mediation offers a promising solution to the problems surrounding redress of medical negligence disputes. / Jurisprudence / LL. M.

Traditionnellement, le droit des entreprises en difficulté recourt à l’autorité judiciaire pour la mise en oeuvre de ses dispositions et la réalisation de ses finalités. Toutefois, considérant l’évolution de ce droit, le traitement « tout judiciaire » des difficultés des entreprises est remis en cause. En effet, il ne s’agit plus seulement de sanctionner, mais davantage de prévenir les difficultés et de sauvegarder les entreprises, ce qui dénature l’office juridictionnel. De plus, les commerçants ne sont plus les seuls concernés par ce droit, ce qui aboutit à l’éclatement de la compétence juridictionnelle. Il y aurait lieu d’envisager d’autres modes de traitement. Prenant en compte l’existence d’un traitement administratif, connu du surendettement, mais, aussi, des entreprises, et favorisant le règlement alternatif des difficultés, une autre voie peut être proposée pour la prise en charge de l’impossibilité économique d’exécuter. La légitimité du juge, dont les interventions seraient recentrées et la compétence spécialisée, en ressortirait renforcée pour le traitement des entreprises en difficulté. / Traditionally, insolvency law appeals to the judicial authority to apply its provisions and to carry out its aims. However, regarding the evolution of this law, the exclusive judicial treatment of the difficulties is challenged. Indeed, it is no longer only to punish but more to prevent difficulties and safeguard businesses, which distorts the judicial office of the judge. In addition, traders are not the only ones affected by this law, leading to the outbreak of jurisdiction. Subsequently, there is a need to consider other modes of treatment. Taking into account the existence of an administrative process, known by over-indebtedness, but also by businesses, and promoting alternative dispute resolution of difficulties, another path can be proposed for the management of the economic impossibility of performance. The legitimacy of the judge, whose interventions would be refocused and skills specialised, would be strengthened in relation to the treatment of undertakings facing difficulties