Le droit des règlements pécuniaires entre époux consécutifs au divorce a pendant longtemps été fondé sur l’idée de sanctionner le conjoint responsable de la rupture que ce soit en France, au Canada ou dans la province canadienne de Québec. Bien que de traditions juridiques différentes, les droits français et canadien reconnaissaient ainsi un rôle central à la faute dans leur droit du divorce. Face à l’évolution concomitante des sociétés française et canadienne vers un individualisme plus marqué et une volonté croissante de pacifier les conflits, ces droits ont dû tendre vers une plus grande objectivation du divorce et de ces conséquences. Parallèlement à un mouvement de quasi-disparition de la faute, de nouvelles institutions sont apparues dans les droits étudiés, institutions fondées sur des idées de compensation, d’équité mais aussi de solidarité avec la survie ou l’apparition d’obligations alimentaires. Aujourd’hui, les droits étudiés sont marqués par une diversité d’institutions avec pour certaines des fondements multiples et des intitulés qui, malgré la différence de tradition juridique, peuvent se répondre comme, par exemple, la pension alimentaire non compensatoire canadienne qui n’est pas sans rappeler la prestation compensatoire que nous qualifions d’alimentaire française. Cette diversité amène alors à s’interroger sur la nécessité de repenser et de rationaliser les institutions existantes pour les rendre tout à la fois plus compréhensibles mais aussi plus accessibles par les futurs ex-époux. Cette simplification doit en effet s’accompagner d’une plus grande liberté contractuelle permettant aux conjoints divorcés de se réapproprier leur séparation avec l’aide d’un avocat, d’un médiateur ou encore du juge. Le divorce pacifié, se pose alors la question de la pacification de la rupture des autres couples que sont les unions libres ou encore les PACS et union civile. Ces unions hors mariage se développant, il est nécessaire aujourd’hui de prendre en considération les conséquences de leur dissolution voire d’envisager un droit commun des règlements pécuniaires consécutifs à toute séparation. / Historically post-divorce laws between spouses was based in France, Canada and Quebec on penalizing the responsible party of the separation. Although from different law traditions, Canadian and French law recognized an important place to the fault in their divorce laws. However, the tendency of the French and Canadian societies to be more individual and to pacify conflicts, divorce law had to change to become more objectivized. The movement of removing the fault in divorce permitted the creation of new institutions based on compensation, equity and solidarity which is symbolized by spousal support and alimony. The studied laws are characterized by diverse institutions, are founded on different grounds. These institutions inspired by different law traditions are thus very similar such as the Canadian on compensatory spousal support and the French compensatory obligation that we call "alimony compensatory obligation". This diversity impose us to think about the possibility of a renewal and rationalization of the existent institutions in order to be simplified and comprehensible for the future divorce spouses. A greater freedom of contract should also ensure the appropriation of the divorce's consequences by the divorced spouse with help of lawyers, mediators and judges. Once the divorce humanized, the question of the pacification of the dissolution/ ruptures of other types of union such as common law marriage or civil partnership. The increasing number of those new couples, it is becoming a necessity to take in consideration the consequences of their dissolution and draw a new common law for their dissolution.

This thesis analyses the existing legal framework that applies to franchising in South Africa today. The study begins with an examination of the history and nature of the franchise contract, focusing particularly on the nature of the franchise relationship. This study is undertaken in order to substantiate the argument that franchising is a unique method of doing business. There is a need therefore to recognise that the franchise contract is a special contract in its own right, just like contracts of sale, lease, insurance and suretyship. The study then goes on to examine the problems which are experienced in the sector, as well as the law which must provide solutions to these problems. The research will show that in a modern commercial world the existing legal framework, especially the common law, cannot adequately deal with many of these problems. The complex relationship between franchising and competition law is also explored. A common thread that emerges from franchise disputes is the lack of protection afforded to the interests of franchisees. Franchisees tend to be at the mercy of economically stronger franchisors, hence the belief that there is a need for a stronger regulatory framework. The study then shifts to proposals for reform. In 2000 the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) established the Franchise Steering Committee in conjunction with the Franchise Association of South Africa (FASA) to review the regulatory environment. This Committee drafted franchise legislation which aimed to bring the regulation of the sector under the control of the DTI. This legislation has not been implemented and the DTI has changed its strategy. Instead of dealing with franchising independently, franchising will fall within the scope of consumer protection legislation. Both the consumer protection legislation and the legislation proposed by the Franchise Steering Committee are thoroughly examined and explained. Shortcomings in the proposals are highlighted and an alternative approach is recommended. It is proposed that franchise-specific legislation should be introduced but that this legislation should establish a system of co-regulation between the government and the franchise sector.

Cette étude est consacrée au droit privé fédéral et à l'interaction entre la législation fédérale et le droit privé des provinces. Elle porte plus précisément sur le rôle des tribunaux dans le cadre de cette interaction. Elle a pour objectif de vérifier comment les juges procèdent à l'unification du droit privé fédéral en évitant de recourir formellement au droit provincial à titre supplétif. Dans un premier temps, elle établit le cadre juridique gouvernant l'interprétation du droit privé fédéral, de même que l'exercice du pouvoir judiciaire dans ce contexte. Dans un deuxième temps, elle analyse à travers un ensemble de jugements les procédés employés par les juges pour réaliser l'unification du droit privé fédéral. Elle conclut que ces procédés peuvent effectivement permettre de réaliser, au plan pratique, une telle unification. Cependant, ces interventions judiciaires sont ponctuelles et sont limitées à certains aspects de la conception ou de l'application des normes de droit privé. Dans les cas plus problématiques, elles peuvent avoir pour effet soit de nier le vide normatif rendant nécessaire le recours aux sources supplétives provinciales, soit de nier la pluralité formelle de ces sources dans le contexte fédéral. / This study is devoted to federal private law and the interaction between federal legislation and provincial private law. In particular, it is devoted to the role of the courts in such interaction. Hs objective is to assess how judges proceed with the unification of federal private law by avoiding formal reference to provincial law to supplement federal legislation. Firstly, the study considers the legal framework governing the interpretation of federal private law, as well as the exercise of judicial power in this context. Secondly, the study reviews means employed by judges, through a series of judgments, to proceed with the unification of federal private law. The study concludes that unification can effectively be achieved through such means. However, these judicial interventions are limited to sorne aspects of the elaboration and application ofprivate norms. In more complex cases, the effect of these interventions may be to disregard normative gaps that make necessary to supplement federal legislation with sources of provincial law, or to deny the plurality of these sources in the federal context.

This dissertation will explore the revolutionary progression in the provision of monetary damages and the availability thereof due to the change in South Africa’s legal system from Parliamentary sovereignty to Constitutional supremacy after the enactment of the final Constitution in 19961. The Constitution of South Africa brought with it the concepts of justification and accountability as the Bill of Rights enshrines fundamental rights and the remedies for the infringement of same. The available remedies for the infringement of a fundamental right flow from two sources, being either from the development of the common law remedies in line with the Bill of Rights or alternatively from Section 38 of the Constitution, which provides for a remedy which provides ‘appropriate’ relief. The question that will be raised in this dissertation is, ‘does appropriate relief include an award of delictual damages?’ or a question related thereto ‘is an award of monetary damages an appropriate remedy?’ The motivation for this dissertation arises from the plethora of case law, especially in the Eastern Cape, that has come to the fore in the last sixteen years, highlighting the injustice of cancellations of social assistance grants and the non-payment of such in South Africa’s social security system, as well as the precedent that was set by our Constitutional Court and Supreme Court in remedying that injustice. The central case to this dissertation is that of Kate v Member of Executive Council for Department of Welfare, Eastern Cape 2005 1 SA 141 SECLD; Member of Executive Council, Department of Welfare, Eastern Cape v Kate 2006 (4) SA 478 (SCA), which is generally regarded as having paved the way for the granting of monetary damages for the infringement of an individual’s constitutional right as same require legal protection. Firstly the past approach to damages will be explored in relation to South Africa’s common law, being the Roman-Dutch law. The common law Aquilian action is the focal point of this dissertation in relation to the common law in that the granting of damages for the infringement of an individual’s social assistance right (being a specific constitutional right framed within the 1996 Constitution) results in pure patrimonial loss which in our common law system was remedied by the actio legis Aquilae. In delict, an award of damages is the primary remedy, aimed at affording compensation in respect of the legal right or interest infringed. After the common law system of damages has been explored, this dissertation will then examine the changes that have developed therefrom, and largely shaped by the current state of disorganization in the National Department of Welfare coupled with the all encompassing power of the final Constitution. The final Constitution provides the power, in section 38 of the 1996 Constitution, for the court to award a monetary remedy for the breach of a constitutional right. The question, however, is “does the award of monetary damages not merely throw money at the problem, whereas the purpose of a constitutional remedy is to vindicate guaranteed rights and prevent or deter future violations?” The battle for domination between the common law approach and the constitutional approach to damages is witnessed as the two systems eventually amalgamate to form an essentially new remedy, unique to South Africa. South Africa’s new system is aligned with the Constitution as the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and underpins the awarding of all damages and, especially, the awarding of constitutional damages. For the sake of completeness, alternatives to monetary damages will also be canvassed in this dissertation. It is hoped that the reader will, in the end, realize that the final Constitution is the supreme law of the land and as such dictates the manner and form in which damages are provided. If such provision is not in alignment with the Constitution, it will be declared invalid. The flexibility of our common law is put to the test, yet it is found to be adaptable to the ever-developing boni mores of society exemplified in the embracing constitutional principles and the production of this new remedy. The courts develop the common law under section 39(2) of the Constitution in order to keep the common law in step with the evolution of our society and the ever changing nature of bonos mores. / National Research Foundation

The thesis deals with monetary remedies in intellectual property infringement suits, focusing on industrial property rights. On the background of enacting of the czech Act number 221/2006 Sb. which implements the directive 2004/48/EC of the European parliament and of the Council, the thesis compares these two texts with each other and also with the proposal for the directive KOM(2003) 46 final in their relevant parts. By doing this, it evaluates the directive and the czech act as the directive's implementation. This evaluation represents the secondary aims of the thesis. Comparison, analysis of factual articles and interviews with relevant experts practicising in the area show that by setting the damages as double the "customary" royalties, the czech Act in his § 5 ods. 2 represents a sanction, which confirms the hypothesis of the prevailance of an analogy between the czech provison and the punitive damages in american law. This fact creates scope for the hypothesis of existance of further analogies, the verification of which is the central aim of the thesis. Therefore, the second part of the thesis analyzes american provisions of the United States Code concerning copyright, trademark and patent law, and related caselaw. This is compared both to the directive and the proposal for it, moreover to the czech copyright Act number 121/2000 Sb. and in particular to the czech Act number 221/2006 Sb. The third part supplements the analysis of relevant czech court decisions. The second and third part identify similar and distinct elements of the provisions and reveal analogies in seemingly different institutes. Differences are spotted in the construct used to achieve the punitive function, furthermore between the terms "customary royalty" and "reasonable royalty" and also between the terms "bezdôvodné obohatenie", "infringer's profits" and "unjust enrichment". Conversely, an analogy is identified between the discretionary power of american courts to increase proven damages or determine statutory damages and the czech institute of "primerané zadosťučinenie" (appropriate satisfaction). The prevailance of prohibition of double recovery is another existing analogy between the american and czech law.

Le phénomène de conventionnalisation du droit de la famille, plus précisément le rôle assigné à la volonté individuelle lors d'un divorce se développe de manière exponentielle. Les sources des obligations conventionnelles étant multiples, il convient de définir les éléments qui les composent. Le contrat ne constitue pas l’unique source des obligations conventionnelles. Cette catégorie doit comprendre l’ensemble des actes juridiques conventionnels. Ceux-ci se définissent comme des manifestations de volonté produisant des effets de droit.En droit du divorce, nombreux sont les accords de volontés que les époux peuvent conclure afin de régler les conséquences patrimoniales et extra-patrimoniales de leur rupture. Cette place croissante, accordée par la loi aux volontés individuelles dans l’aménagement des conséquences du divorce, invite à s’interroger sur la qualification des accords conclus par les époux. L’étude des obligations conventionnelles nées du divorce permet de démontrer que des contrats de droit commun s’épanouissent dans le droit du divorce et que parallèlement des conventions du divorce, caractérisées par l’intervention du juge, se développent en marge des principes issus du droit des contrats.En définitive, dans un contexte où est promue la liberté individuelle, les contrats de droit commun constituent un instrument privilégié pour des époux qui souhaitent organiser les conséquences patrimoniales de leur rupture. Cependant, l’ordre public familial inhérent au domaine extra-patrimonial persiste. À cet égard, il faut souligner que la théorie générale des obligations n’a pas vocation à mettre en péril l’état des personnes qui par nature doit demeurer indisponible. / The phenomenon of conventionalisation of family law and more precisely the role assigned to individual will in divorce has been increasing exponentially. As the sources of conventional obligations are multiple, it appears essential to define the variouselements that make up this specific group. Contracts are not the only source of conventional obligations. This last category should include all conventional legal acts which can be defined as expressions of will intending to produce legal effect.In divorce law, the voluntary agreements spouses are allowed to conclude in order tosettle the patrimonial and extra-patrimonial consequences of their separation are numerous. The growing importance given by law to individual will in order to settle the consequences of divorce calls for the examination of the genuine qualification ofspouses’ agreements. The analysis of the conventional obligations originating from divorce demonstrates that common law contracts flourish in divorce law while, at the same time, divorce agreements develop on the fringes of the guiding principles of contract law. Regarding these conventions, judges’ interventions add to individual willso as to reach perfect agreements. Eventually, in a context where individual freedom is promoted, common law contracts are a privileged tool for spouses who wish to organize themselves the patrimonial consequences of their separation. However, matrimonial public order legislation remains and cannot be dissociated from the extra-patrimonial field. In this regard, it should be noted that the general theory of the law of obligations does not intend to endanger the status of persons which must inherently remain inalienable.

L’eau constitue un élément naturel fondamental dans la constitution des communautés humaines qui se sont regroupées autour d’elle. Ces sociétés de l’eau se sont organisées en fonction de la ressource qui fonde les liens juridiques entre leurs membres. L’on remarque alors l’existence d’une solidarité écologique qui lie les individus entre eux, et conduit à l’émergence de règles de droit en fonction des pratiques mises en œuvre au sein de ces communautés. Généralement qualifiées de coutumes, ces règles sont spontanées dans le sens où ses promoteurs en sont également les récepteurs, et sont transmises à l’échelle d’un groupement identifié qui assure leur pérennité. Les usages de l’eau désignent alors tant les utilisations qui sont faites de la ressource, que les règles de droit qu’elles induisent. La généralisation d’un droit commun à vocation uniformisatrice du système juridique français conduit à marginaliser l’existence de systèmes de droit traditionnels. Pour autant, certains territoires ruraux appliquent encore des règles spontanées et coutumières dans le cadre de l’exploitation de la ressource en eau, à des fins d’irrigation ou de pisciculture. S’opposent alors le droit coutumier et le droit commun qui s’appliquent à l’eau. Ces usages sont alors confrontés aux règles propres à la préservation de la propriété et à la protection de l’environnement. Bien que leurs finalités diffèrent radicalement, le droit spontané contribue à la réalisation des objectifs du droit de l’environnement dans la mesure où il participe à une gestion équilibrée et durable de la ressource en eau. Le renouvellement des formes juridiques des règles traditionnelles permet ainsi d’envisager la coexistence de ces deux ordres normatifs sur certains territoires ruraux dans la perspective de consacrer un pluralisme juridique. / Water is a fundamental natural element in the formation of human communities that have gathered around it. These water societies are organized according to the resource that bases the legal links between their members. We notice the existence of an ecological solidarity that binds people together and leads to the emergence of rules of law based on the practices implemented within these communities. Generally referred to as customs, these rules are spontaneous because their promoters are also the receivers, and are transmitted on the scale of an identified group that ensures their sustainability. The uses of water then designate both the uses that are made of the resource, and the rules of law they induce. The generalization of a common law with a unifying purpose of the French legal system leads to the marginalization of the existence of traditional systems of law. However, some rural areas still apply spontaneous and customary rules for the exploitation of water resources for irrigation or fish farming purposes. Customary law and the common law that applies to water seem to be opposed. These uses are then confronted with the rules dedicated to the protection of property rights and the environmental preservation. Although their purposes differ radically, the spontaneous right contributes to the achievement of the objectives of environmental law insofar as it contributes to a balanced and sustainable management of the water resource. The renewal of the legal forms of the traditional rules makes it possible to envisage the coexistence of these two normative orders on certain rural territories in the perspective of devoting a legal pluralism.

LLM / Department of Public Law

La responsabilité du fait des dommages de travaux publics est habituellement considérée comme une hypothèse originale de responsabilité. Son ancienneté, sa structure et les règles qui la composent l’éloigneraient des droits administratif et civil de la responsabilité. L’étude de la matière des travaux publics montre toutefois qu’à deux époques différentes, l’isolement de ces règles doit être relativisé. Historiquement, elles ont été fondatrices de la responsabilité administrative. En tant que toute première hypothèse de responsabilité, les dommages de travaux publics ont constitué un véritable prélude à son principe, et partant, ont détenu un rôle précurseur. Ils ont en outre formé la matrice des régimes et des conditions de la responsabilité administrative. Actuellement, l’originalité de certaines règles propres à la matière des travaux publics est en déclin. Elle est d’abord en voie de réduction, car malgré la persistance du particularisme attaché à la classification des dommages de travaux publics, la spécificité de ses règles techniques est de plus en plus atténuée. Elle est ensuite en voie de disparition, au regard de son éviction par d’autres règles situées en dehors du droit commun de la responsabilité administrative, voire de son effacement à la comparaison avec le droit civil. L’originalité de la responsabilité du fait des dommages de travaux publics tend ainsi à devenir progressivement un vestige du passé. / Public liability for wrongs caused by public works is usually understood as an original and peculiar case of liability. Its existence, its structure and the rules applied to it made it different from classical administrative accountability or civil liability. Nevertheless, the study of the topic shows that at two different times such an assessment should have been more balanced. From an historic perspective, rules for public liability in the context of wrongs caused by public works are the foundation of French administrative accountability. Rules for public works had the leading role in the development of administrative accountability and were the mould for the doctrines and principles of administrative responsibility. Currently, the peculiarity of some rules applied to public works are in decline. Firstly, despite the persistence and the use of a classification specific to public liability in the context of public works, the particularity of its rules is lessened. Secondly, this peculiarity is endangered as other rules for liability coming from administrative law or civil law are preferred to its application. Thus, the originality of the public liability for wrongs caused by public works seems to become a thing of the past.

Ce mémoire étudie les divers sens que prend la notion de droit commun en droit civil québécois: le plus souvent, il est vu comme droit ordinaire et comme droit fondamental général. Il explore en premier lieu l'évolution de la notion au Québec. Il examine ensuite les lieux d'expression du droit commun: surtout le Code civil, mais aussi le droit coutumier, la tradition de droit civil, et même, dans certains cas, la common law d'Angleterre. Finalement, il analyse les rôles que joue le droit commun: un rôle structurant (comme armature du droit et de la pensée juridique), un rôle de référence (vocabulaire et concepts de base), un rôle dans l'interprétation du droit et un rôle supplétif en comblant les lacunes dans les lois et les contrats. Ces rôles sont essentiels pour décrire l'importance du droit commun dans l'ordre juridique québécois.