La conciliation, un mécanisme alternatif de résolution des conflits, cherche à la fois à maintenir une relation d'affaires ainsi qu'à raviver la communication et l’équilibre des pouvoirs entre deux parties opposées. Son véritable esprit consiste à faire en sorte que le citoyen récupère son rôle principal dans la solution de ses conflits et qu’il agisse sans l'intervention de l'État. Contrairement aux autres systèmes juridiques, le système juridique colombien donne au conciliateur un pouvoir décisionnel et/ou consultatif dans un cas concret. Aussi, les termes médiation et conciliation sont parfois utilisés comme synonymes. Cependant, ces termes se différencient selon la participation du tiers conciliateur ou médiateur au processus de résolution des conflits. In mediation, the mediator controls the process through different and specific stages: introduction, joint session, caucus, and agreement, while the parties control the outcome. Par ailleurs, même si ce sont des concepts universels grâce aux textes juridiques, ces mécanismes de résolution des conflits demeurent encore méconnus des citoyens. La pratique de la conciliation ne connaît pas de frontières; elle est répandue partout dans le monde. Dans les années 90, les pays d’Amérique latine, plus précisément la Colombie, ont commencé à envisager la possibilité de prendre part dans cette enrichissante expérience grâce aux progrès législatifs et institutionnels qui ont été réalisés en matière de mécanismes alternatifs de résolution des conflits. En matière de conciliation, en Colombie, il y a une grande richesse normative mais les lois, dispersées et difficiles à interpréter, génèrent de l’insécurité et de l’incertitude juridique. De plus, entamer le processus de conciliation se fait de diverses manières, la plus controversée étant sans doute la conciliation préalable obligatoire. Cette méthode imposée a été la cible de diverses critiques. En effet, ces critiques concernent le fait qu’une telle pratique obligatoire enfreint le volontariat, un pilier fondamental de la conciliation. Aussi, le tiers conciliateur, ayant une formation de haut niveau, représente une pièce maîtresse dans le processus de conciliation vu sa grande responsabilité dans le bon déroulement de cette méthode de résolution des conflits. / Conciliation, an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, allows the maintenance of a business relation and the revival of communication as well as an equilibrium of power between two opposing parties. It's true spirit consists in allowing the citizen to recover his principal role in the resolution of his conflicts and enables him to do so without the intervention of the State. Unlike other judicial systems, the Columbian judicial system gives the conciliator a decisional power and/or consultative in a particular case. Also, the terms mediation and conciliation are sometimes used like synonyms. However, those terms are differentiated by the participation of a third party conciliator or mediator in the process of conflict resolution. In addition, even though those concepts are universal thanks to the judicial texts, those mechanisms remain unknown to most citizens. The practice of conciliation has no boundaries; it is widespread all over the world. In the 1990's, Latin countries, more specifically Columbia, started to investigate the possibility of taking part in this enriching experience thanks to legislative and institutional progress in the field of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. In the field of conciliation, in Columbia, there is a vast normative richness but the laws, dispersed and difficult to interpret, generate insecurity and judicial uncertainty. Also, the conciliation process can be initiated by many ways, the most controversial being without a doubt the obligatory conciliation beforehand. This imposed method has been the target of many critics. In fact, those critics concerns the obligatory nature of the conciliation which impedes on the voluntary aspect, a fundamental pillar in the conciliation process. Also, the third party conciliator, possessing a highly trained background, represents a pivotal role in the conciliation process: a high level of responsibility weighs upon his shoulders as he oversees this alternate conflict resolution method.

Vu la nature complexe de la matière fiscale et son lien étroit à un environnement évolutif, le litige entre contribuables et administration devient une réalité inéluctable. Aujourd’hui, la pratique fiscale révèle que la voie juridictionnelle n’est pas toujours la meilleure façon de satisfaire aux besoins des litigants. Sous cet angle, le fisc veut instaurer de nouveaux instruments de règlement du litige, dit modes amiables, pour des nouveaux rapports avec le contribuable. En effet, la DGI examine aujourd’hui les différentes dimensions de ses litiges avec les contribuables, dont le but est d’aboutir à une gestion participative. Pour ce faire, elle cherche à mettre en place une pratique qui fournit de nouvelles manières d’aborder les difficultés. Il s’agit d’une nouvelle approche qui se focalise sur les éléments les plus importants du litige, elle propose un mode de règlement amiable de style coopératif, visant d’abord à identifier les intérêts mutuels pour une solution consensuelle. Cette pratique non juridictionnelle du règlement de litige évolue très rapidement. Elle a suscité un débat passionnant au sein de la théorie du droit public, tant sur le plan du fond que sur le plan de la forme. Les spécialistes ont débattus en effet les différentes possibilités juridiques de l’intégrer dans les procédures et de la mettre en examen pour tester sa comptabilité avec le système fiscal. Au bout du compte, la pratique qui a été admise par la DGI est celle de règlement négocié du litige, aboutissant à une transaction. Cette évolution reflète la montée en puissance de l’autorité de la fonction consultative en matière fiscale. En pratique, cela entraîne l’invention des instruments administratifs ou juridiques propres à l’administration fiscale qui facilitent le mécanisme de règlement du litige. L’incorporation des pratiques amiables reconnaît l’intérêt croissant de faire face au litige, mais quelques améliorations restent encore à réaliser, car le mécanisme a besoin d’un appui législatif et juridique, mais aussi d’une véritable volonté d’éliminer tout litige de la part du contribuable. / Given the complex legal nature of the tax and its close connection to a changing environment in Morocco, the conflict between the tax administration and its users become an inescapable reality. The judicial process was and is the traditional tool to adjust, but the Moroccan tax practice today reveals that this route is not always the best way to meet the needs of litigants. From this angle, the Moroccan tax legislator wants to introduce new tax disputes resolution tools for new relations between the tax authorities and taxpayers. The Moroccan tax administration examines now the different dimensions of his disputes with the different categories of taxpayers. The long term goal is to achieve participatory management of disputes. To this end, the DGI seeks to put in place following the new instruments that provide new ways to see the disputes that may arise between different tax services and their users. The current approach focuses on the most important elements of the conflict between the administration of the taxpayer, and that impact on how to approach and manage. This approach offers alternative methods of settling tax disputes cooperative style first to identify mutual interests for a consensual solution. These non-judicial methods of settling tax disputes evolve very quickly in the Moroccan case. They aroused passionate debate in the theory of public law, both on the substance of the plan on the level of form. Moroccan specialists have indeed discussed the various legal possibilities of integrating them into the overall system of dispute resolution, which have been under investigation to test their compatibility with the tax system. The accepted and mastered by DGI modes are negotiated settlement of tax disputes techniques such as negotiation and transaction. Other collection methods and under different and innovative forms in tax matters are being explored to integrate into the system. This reflects the rise of the authority of the advisory function in tax matters. In practice, this leads to the invention of administrative or legal instruments to the tax authorities that facilitate dispute resolution mechanism. Thus, the incorporation of alternative dispute resolution recognizes the growing interest to deal with tax disputes, but some improvements are still to be made, since the mechanism needs a legislative and legal support in Morocco, but also a real willingness to eliminate tax disputes from Moroccan citizens.

Cette étude traite de la comparaison du régime de la responsabilité délictuelle du fait d’autrui en droit français et en droit chinois.Dans une première partie, plutôt micro-vision, la thèse se consacre à une étude au cas par cas des responsabilités du fait d’autrui dans les deux systèmes juridiques. Il s’agit précisément de la responsabilité du fait des mineurs (la responsabilité des parents en droit français et des tuteurs en droit chinois ainsi que la responsabilité des instituteurs en droit français et des établissements scolaires en droit chinois), de la responsabilité des employeurs du fait des personnes qu’ils emploient dans les deux droits et de la responsabilité générale du fait d’autrui qui est admise particulièrement en droit français, à la différence du droit chinois.La deuxième partie apporte une vision d’ensemble et propose au sein des deux systèmes de droit une étude des rapports internes du régime entre les différentes hypothèses de cette responsabilité ainsi qu’un examen des rapports externes de ce régime avec les responsabilités personnelles de droit commun et les mécanismes d’indemnisation collective.Pourtant, de ce mécanisme appliqué aux deux systèmes, l’analyse révèle un inconvénient commun : une harmonisation du régime fait défaut. A cet égard, sous la condition préalable de ne pas nuire à la particularité de chaque cas de figure, l’étude tente de restaurer une cohérence tant dans les rapports « internes » du régime de responsabilité du fait d’autrui, que dans ses rapports « externes » avec d’autres régimes. / This study is about a comparison of vicarious liability in French juridical system and in Chinese juridical system.In first part of this article, a more micro-vision, it is analyzed case by case of specific vicarious liability in two judicial systems. It is precisely about the acts of minors (the liability of parents in French law and liability of guardians in Chinese law, also the liability of teachers in French law and liability of school in Chinese law), the liability of employers and masters in two juridical systems and the general vicarious liability that is accepted particularly in French law, while the latter is different in Chinese law.The second part of this article concerns a whole vision and proposes a study of internal relations of two systems between different hypotheses of vicarious liability, and also an investigation of external relations of this system with the personal responsibility of “common law” and the mechanisms of collective compensation.However, of this mechanism applied at two systems, analysis reveals a common disadvantage: a lack of harmonization. In this aspect, considering the precondition of avoiding doing harm to particularity of each case of figure, the study tries to restore coherence both “internal” relations in systems of vicarious liability and “external” relations with other systems.

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

Malgré que les milieux de travail aient subi plusieurs transformations dans les dernières décennies, les employeurs sont en constante recherche de flexibilité ce qui crée des impacts notamment sur les statuts d’emploi et le temps de travail. Ces changements ont eu pour effet de placer l’enjeu de la conciliation emploi-famille (CEF) au cœur des discussions. Bien qu’il y ait eu du progrès sur le marché du travail concernant la conciliation emploi-famille (CEF) durant les dernières années, certaines problématiques demeurent. La principale problématique étant l’incompatibilité entre les sphères professionnelles et familiales et ces dernières peuvent avoir des répercussions négatives chez les différents acteurs. Cette recherche s’intéresse à l’effet de la présence syndicale sur l’accès à des mesures de CEF et leur efficacité perçue par les professionnel(le)s en ressources humaines. Cette étude quantitative se base sur des données secondaires qui ont été recueillies par Émilie Genin et Mélanie Laroche, professeures à l’École des Relations industrielles de l’Université de Montréal entre 2017 et 2018. La collecte des données a été réalisée en partenariat avec l’Ordre des conseils en ressources humaines et relations industrielles agréés du Québec (CRHA). Notre échantillon est représenté par un total de 249 répondants. Les hypothèses de recherche ont été testées en utilisant des données recueillies auprès de professionnel(le)s en ressources humaines ou en relations industrielles, membres de l’Ordre des CRHA du Québec. Nous cherchions à comprendre si la syndicalisation a un effet sur le nombre de mesures offertes de CEF et si la syndicalisation a un effet modérateur sur la relation entre les mesures de CEF et leur efficacité perçue. Notre modèle d’analyse nous permet de dégager différents constats. Les résultats de la recherche montrent que la syndicalisation n’a pas d’effet sur le nombre de mesures de CEF offertes dans les organisations. Une relation positive a aussi été constatée entre le nombre de mesures de CEF et leur efficacité perçue par les professionnel(le)s en ressources humaines. Finalement, nos résultats montrent que la syndicalisation n’a pas de relation de modération sur la présence de mesures de CEF et leur efficacité perçue. Face à ces constats, nous visons de contribuer à la littérature en se centralisant sur l’effet de la présence syndicale quant à l’accès aux mesures de CEF et leur efficacité perçue. Alors que peu de recherches s’intéressent de manière spécifique à ces éléments, notre étude permet une réflexion quant à l’impact de la présence syndicale sur la CEF. Cette étude sert aussi de référence à tous les employeurs, les syndicats et les gouvernements qui souhaitent mettre au premier plan l’enjeu de la CEF. / Even though workplaces have undergone several transformations in recent decades, employers are constantly looking for flexibility, which has particularly impacted employment status and working time. These changes had the effect of raising the issue of work/life balance (WLB) at the heart of discussions. Although there has been progress in the labor market regarding WLB in recent years, some issues remain. The main one being the incompatibility between the professional and family spheres which can have negative repercussions. This research will examine the effects of union presence on access to WLB measures and their perceived effectiveness by human resources professionals. This quantitative study is based on data collected by Émilie Genin and Mélanie Laroche, professors at the School of Industrial Relations of the University of Montreal between 2017 and 2018. The data was collected in partnership with the Ordre des conseillers en ressources humaines et relations industrielles agréés du Québec (CRHA). Our data is constituted by a sampling of 249 respondents. The research hypotheses were tested using data collected from human resources or industrial relations professionals, members of the Ordre des CRHA du Québec. In this research, we sought to understand whether unionization has an effect on the number of WLB measures offered in the workplace and whether unionization has a moderating effect on the relationship between WLB measures and their perceived effectiveness. Our model allows us to make various findings. Research results show that unionization has no effect on the number of WLB measures offered in organizations. A positive relationship was also observed between the number of WLB measures and their perceived effectiveness by human resources professionals. Finally, our results show that unionization does not have a moderating relationship on the presence of WLB measures and their perceived effectiveness. We aimed to contribute to the literature by focusing on the effect of union presence on access to WLB measures and their perceived effectiveness. While little research specifically examines these elements, our study allows for reflection on the impact of union presence on the WLB. This study also serves as a reference for all employers, unions and governments who wish to shed some light on the issue of WLB.

Depuis quelques années le recours à l’enneigement artificiel est de plus en plus courant dans les stations de ski des Alpes mais également dans les autres massifs français et étrangers. Cependant la production de neige nécessite l’utilisation d’un volume d’eau important, souvent pompé dans les réserves d’eau potable, les rivières, les nappes phréatiques, ou bien dans les réserves collinaires, elles-mêmes alimentées par captage des eaux de ruissellement. Or l’enneigement n’est pas le seul usage de l’eau dans les stations de sports d’hiver, et ce nouveau besoin concerne la saison hivernale lors des étiages des cours d’eau et des besoins pour les diverses activités. Depuis quelques années, cette technique fait l’objet de nombreuses controverses au sein de la communauté scientifique, politique et des populations locales, car les volumes d’eau pompés sont particulièrement importants. Notre recherche s’appuie sur des enquêtes auprès des acteurs impliqués, des observations de terrain et des mesures, à différentes échelles de travail. Deux modèles de production de neige sont confrontés : Avoriaz (France) et Champéry (Suisse). Les impacts des usages sur le fonctionnement hydrologique du bassin versant de la Dranse de Sous-Saix, sur le domaine d’Avoriaz, sont aujourd’hui limités et dans les deux stations la ressource est actuellement suffisante pour satisfaire tous les besoins. A ce jour les situations de pénuries d’eau et de conflits autour de la ressource sont rares, et sont dues à des problèmes de gestion. Un ensemble de propositions inspirées d’initiatives locales pour une meilleure gestion de la production de neige et des usages de l’eau a été proposé. / For some years now the use of artificial snow has become increasingly frequent in Alpine skiing resorts as well as in the other French and foreign massifs. Nevertheless, snowmaking calls for a large amount of water, which is often pumped from drinking water reserves, rivers, groundwater tables or else from hill water reserves, themselves supplied from surface water capture. This relatively recent practice, added to the different activities already present, is of concern for the local populations and environmental associations. For several years now, this technique has been the subject of numerous controversies within the scientific and political community and local populations. As things stand, the work performed by researchers and, more particularly, geographers is thin on the ground, because the volumes of water pumped are particularly important. Our research is based on interviews whit those involved in snow production, field observation and measures. Two model of artificial snow are confronted : Avoriaz (France) and Champéry (Switzerland). The impacts of the uses on the hydrological functioning of the Dranse de Sous Saix catchment area, in Avoriaz’s area are now limited and in both resorts, the resource is currently sufficient to satisfy all the needs. At the present time water shortages or conflicts involving the resource are unusual, and are thus due to management problems. A set of proposals inspired local initiatives for a better artificial snow management and water uses management have been proposed.

M.Phil. / The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 introduced new structures for resolution of labour disputes. The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) was established as an independent body to resolve labour disputes. The CCMA also took over the functions of the old Industrial Court. The Act also replaced the old Industrial councils with bargaining councils. The function of the bargaining councils is to play a parallel role to the CCMA in dispute resolution within their scope of jurisdiction. The purpose of the legislature in establishing the bargaining councils was to alleviate part of the burden of the CCMA in resolving of labour disputes. The Act envisaged that the CCMA would resolve disputes speedily and inexpensively. If bargaining councils fail in their task of resolving disputes, these disputes are referred back to the CCMA adding to its caseload. The study seeks to establish the effectiveness of bargaining councils in handling dispute resolution function and whether they assist the CCMA in alleviating part of its burden. There are 43 bargaining councils that are accredited by the CCMA to conciliate and arbitrate disputes. Some bargaining councils are accredited to do both conciliations and arbitrations but are failing to perform both tasks. Some bargaining councils are closing down. Other registered bargaining councils do not apply for accreditation. Disputes that are not handled by these councils are referred to the CCMA. The CCMA caseload is escalating every year since inception in 1996. In view of these circumstances the study seeks to understand from bargaining councils and from both the unions and employers organizations that are party to the bargaining council agreements, whether there are any problems that hinder the effectiveness of bargaining councils in dispute resolution in the private sector. It has been concluded in the study that there are a number of problems that can cause bargaining councils not to exercise dispute resolution function effectively. It has been established that only few bargaining councils receive a high number of disputes referred. Bargaining councils are quicker in handling disputes than the CCMA, however, most bargaining councils receive a small number of disputes. Bargaining councils also complain about insufficient funds in handling dispute resolution function. They complain that the subsidy they receive from the CCMA is not enough for this function. Small bargaining councils are the most suffering because of low numbers of referrals. It has also been established that bargaining councils pay their panelists very high rates. The non-accredited bargaining councils are rejected when applying for accreditation because of not meeting the required criteria. Employers are negative about belonging to bargaining councils because they feel it is costly. Some employers who belong to bargaining councils are also reluctant to contribute to established council's fund.

A presente dissertação investiga a possibilidade jurídica e as limitações da utilização de meios consensuais para resolução de conflitos que tenham a Administração Pública como parte. Mais especificamente, a dissertação tratará da escolha entre valer-se de meios consensuais para a solução do conflito ou de relegá-lo a um meio adjudicatório, especialmente o processo judicial. No primeiro capítulo, o trabalho situa a adoção dos meios consensuais pela Administração Pública no contexto de desenvolvimento das ADRs no Brasil, com influência da experiência norte-americana. No segundo, trata de revisitar alguns dogmas do Direito Administrativo que possam configurar óbices à adoção dos meios consensuais, como a legalidade estrita e a supremacia do interesse público, bem como situar novamente o tema no contexto de expansão da atuação administrativa consensual. O terceiro capítulo apresenta conceitos importantes para compreender a questão como: interesse público e indisponibilidade; meios adjudicatórios de solução de conflitos; meios consensuais de solução de conflitos (negociação, mediação e conciliação). No quarto capítulo, serão abordadas as limitações que o regime de direito público impõe à adoção de meios consensuais pela Administração Pública. O quinto capítulo traz um contraponto aos meios consensuais, relatando algumas críticas e riscos de sua adoção. Por fim, o sexto capítulo relata pesquisa empírica realizada na Procuradoria-Geral do Município de São Paulo com a finalidade de revelar experiências e óbices práticos à adoção de meios consensuais. / This essay investigates the legal possibility and limitations of the use of consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution by Public Administration as one of the parties. More specifically, the essay addresses the choice between using consensual mechanisms to resolve the dispute or relegate it to adjudication, especially the judicial process. In the first chapter, the essay poses the use of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration in the context of ADRs development in Brazil, influenced by north american experience. In the second chapter, the essay revisits some tenets of Administrative Law that may constitute obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms, such as strict legality and the supremacy of the public interest, and also poses the issue in the context of the expansion of consensual administrative action. The third chapter presents important concepts to understand the issue, such as: public interest and availability; adjudicatory mechanisms of dispute resolution; consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution (negotiation, mediation and conciliation). The fourth chapter adresses the limitations imposed by Public Law to the adoption of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration. The fifth chapter provides a counterpoint to consensual mechanisms, reporting some criticism and risks of its adoption. Finally, the sixth chapter reports empirical research conducted at São Paulo Citys Attorney General Office in order to reveal experiences and practical obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms.

O objetivo central desta tese é verificar se e como a utilização da conciliação pode conferir efetividade à prestação jurisdicional, compreendida pela pacificação com Justiça, destacando a dimensão qualitativa do instituto. Contextualizou-se para tanto o tema, analisando o Poder Judiciário, a atividade jurisdicional e a cultura da pacificação na contemporaneidade, e se examinou em seguida o tratamento de conflitos por meios consensuais. A investigação do objeto desta tese tem início no terceiro capítulo, com a construção institucional da conciliação, a que se seguem - no quarto capítulo - as delimitações nas cortes de Justiça, depurando a respectiva aplicação aos conflitos civis, na tentativa de superar preconceitos e determinar em que medida denota efetividade. No quinto capítulo, analisa-se a conciliação aplicada, com destaque para a verificação do método, pela dinâmica existente entre a técnica e os sujeitos envolvidos, estabelecendo as balizas objetivas e subjetivas da conciliação na prestação jurisdicional civil. O sexto capítulo apresenta a tese, confirmando a hipótese estabelecida na introdução - há efetividade da prestação jurisdicional civil a partir da conciliação - e sintetiza suas condições. A resposta ao conflito pela conciliação verifica-se pelo engendramento de soluções integrativas, que contemplem todas as partes envolvidas. Nessa construção institucional revelam-se diversos elementos constitutivos, dado que a negociação por princípios não contempla a infinidade de variações vistas no Judiciário. Daí por que a interdisciplinaridade, a comunicação de primeira e segunda ordem, a teoria dos sistemas, a teoria dos jogos e a tipologia dos conflitos são temas afeitos à conciliação, como meio apto de solucionar conflitos no sistema de Justiça atual. O estudo ora apresentado enaltece a conciliação por meio de bases constitutivas próprias, que afastem o instituto de informalismos e concentrem-se no entendimento de sua técnica, permitindo refinar os caminhos rumo à efetividade da prestação jurisdicional. / The main goal of this thesis is to verify if conciliation must be used in the Courts and how to use it to improve their effectiveness. For the purpose of this work, effectiveness indicates the ability for a fair pacification of conflicts, in order to stress the qualitative view of the institute. The analysis of the Judiciary, in which the thesiss subject is contextualized, takes in account the judicial activities and the culture of pacification, as it is presently conceived. This set foundations to analyse how disputes are dealt by consensual means of resolution. The focus in the most important topic of this thesis begins in chapter 3, in which the institutional construction of conciliation is drawn. In other hand, chapter 4 works the limitations of conciliation in the Courts, discussing it application to private disputes, putting prejudices aside and determining to what extent effectiveness could be achieved. Chapter 5 analyzes conciliation as it is done, in particular the question of method and the balance between technique and involved people, determining the objective and subjective boundaries of conciliation in civil jurisdiction. The hypothesis presented in the introduction is confirmed in chapter 6, upholding that conciliation makes judicial services more effective. Otherwise the final chapter sums up the conditions to get effective outputs through conciliation in the judicial environment. The resolution of dispute through conciliation is obtained by mixing integrative means, taking in account all parts. In this institutional construction several constitutive elements rise up, since only negotiation through principles does not allow to reach all existing diversity of situations embraced by Judiciary. That is why an interdisciplinary approach is need, including first and second order communication, systems theory, theory of games and tipology of conflicts. The present study assert the qualities of conciliation on its own constitutive bases, what means to get it hide of any informalism and embedded in its own technique, making if feasible to improve the effectiveness of judicial servives.

A presente dissertação investiga a possibilidade jurídica e as limitações da utilização de meios consensuais para resolução de conflitos que tenham a Administração Pública como parte. Mais especificamente, a dissertação tratará da escolha entre valer-se de meios consensuais para a solução do conflito ou de relegá-lo a um meio adjudicatório, especialmente o processo judicial. No primeiro capítulo, o trabalho situa a adoção dos meios consensuais pela Administração Pública no contexto de desenvolvimento das ADRs no Brasil, com influência da experiência norte-americana. No segundo, trata de revisitar alguns dogmas do Direito Administrativo que possam configurar óbices à adoção dos meios consensuais, como a legalidade estrita e a supremacia do interesse público, bem como situar novamente o tema no contexto de expansão da atuação administrativa consensual. O terceiro capítulo apresenta conceitos importantes para compreender a questão como: interesse público e indisponibilidade; meios adjudicatórios de solução de conflitos; meios consensuais de solução de conflitos (negociação, mediação e conciliação). No quarto capítulo, serão abordadas as limitações que o regime de direito público impõe à adoção de meios consensuais pela Administração Pública. O quinto capítulo traz um contraponto aos meios consensuais, relatando algumas críticas e riscos de sua adoção. Por fim, o sexto capítulo relata pesquisa empírica realizada na Procuradoria-Geral do Município de São Paulo com a finalidade de revelar experiências e óbices práticos à adoção de meios consensuais. / This essay investigates the legal possibility and limitations of the use of consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution by Public Administration as one of the parties. More specifically, the essay addresses the choice between using consensual mechanisms to resolve the dispute or relegate it to adjudication, especially the judicial process. In the first chapter, the essay poses the use of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration in the context of ADRs development in Brazil, influenced by north american experience. In the second chapter, the essay revisits some tenets of Administrative Law that may constitute obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms, such as strict legality and the supremacy of the public interest, and also poses the issue in the context of the expansion of consensual administrative action. The third chapter presents important concepts to understand the issue, such as: public interest and availability; adjudicatory mechanisms of dispute resolution; consensual mechanisms of dispute resolution (negotiation, mediation and conciliation). The fourth chapter adresses the limitations imposed by Public Law to the adoption of consensual mechanisms by Public Administration. The fifth chapter provides a counterpoint to consensual mechanisms, reporting some criticism and risks of its adoption. Finally, the sixth chapter reports empirical research conducted at São Paulo Citys Attorney General Office in order to reveal experiences and practical obstacles to the adoption of consensual mechanisms.