No description available.

No description available.

The thesis deals with the issues of pre-trial detention in the criminal procedure of the Czech Republic. It comprises and compares opinions voiced by various scholars, high courts and myself. The thesis also includes a section about the rules of pre-trial detention in the American federal criminal procedure and compares it with the Czech system. The first part of the thesis is the Introduction, in which the goals of the thesis are set out. The second part is the main part of the thesis and it is divided into five chapters. The first chapter consists of a general description of pre-trial detention in the Czech Republic and the principles that govern it. The second part is called Formal Rules of Pre-Trial Detention, and it deals with the issues of competence, court procedure and decision-making. The third chapter is where the focus point of the thesis lies, as it investigates the conditions of ordering a pre-trial detention of a person and adresses the numerous problems that arise in this area. The fourth chapter describes the conditions for pre-trial release of an accused person, including the legislative changes recetly made in this area. The fifth chapter explores the American federal criminal procedure and compares it with the Czech criminal procedure. It also includes American scholars'...

DISPUTES IN TRADEMARKS - CONSTANTS AND SPECIFICITY IN JUDICIAL Presented diploma work on above mentioned theme is focused on judicial activity of authoritative bodies or courts, which are or were authorized to give judgements in area of trademarks. First part of the work is naturally an introduction, which contains only general information about chosen topic and trademarks. After that brief history presentation of trademarks area follows. Then is the reader familiarized with actual regulations in force. This part is divided into two subchapters - the first one is focused on substantive law, the second on procedural law. In the second part is also closer explained why was chosen this topic of the diploma work, which is related to variety and diversity of case law in this matter. At the same time author presents authoritative bodies or courts, which give decisions in the area of questions - trademarks (brands). Due regards are taken relative to membership of Czech Republic in the European Union, and therefore to its regulations as well. Main chapter of presented diploma work is chapter three. In this chapter comes closer and detailed explanation of three, for the area of trademarks due to opinion of author fundamental, questions - likelihood of confusion, distinctive capability and trademark usage. In...

New Approaches to Legal Reasoning as Used in Case-Law - Summary The phenomenon of legal interpretation and argumentation theory has become increasingly popular in the Czech Republic. The thesis first aims to summarize theories (or methodologies) of three Anglo-Saxon scholars, Neil MacCormick, Ronald Dworkin and William N. Eskridge. In the thesis, three respective theoretic chapters are dedicated to theories of legal interpretation as presented by each of them. After exploring philosophic backgrounds of the theories briefly, main focus was put on sets of different interpretation methods and interpretive arguments these scholars find most relevant. Subsequently, I tried to analyse the arguments and to examine role different legal arguments play in the process of interpretation as described in works of the three scholars. Each theory is eventually explicated on a convenient law case mentioned in one of its author's books. The second aim of the thesis is to apply the theories as summarised in the theoretical part on Czech law cases to find out whether the theories are successfully applicable considering differences of Czech (continental) legal system and common-law-based legal orders as well as whether such application might prove helpful to a Czech law interpret. For that reason several important Czech "hard"...

The phenomenon of the case law and publication of the case law reports has been present in our legal culture at least since the 13th century, as well as in some other European countries. Court decisions in writing occurred through several types of documents and sources. We can trace the case law documents in the public royal records ("the plates"), the law books and the first constitutional codifications of law. There is even particular group of the law collections which we can actually name as the original case law reports. The case law reports were designed even before this period of time. Unfortunately, no such original law reports survived up to the present day. We can strongly state the sustainable tradition of typical case law collections in the Czech legal culture since the medieval times. The very first case law reports in modern sense of meaning came in late 1850`s. But the periodicals case law reports in the Czech language eventually appeared with the year of 1918 when the Czech state was restored. Creating the case law reports and its headnotes falls within the process of court decisions publication. The courts, which constitute the top of the judicial pyramid, operate with their special individual instruments on their case law publication. The official law reports have been established...

Debatable cases of failure to provide assistance in Czech court case law The thesis focuses on crimes of failure to provide assistance and related case law of Czech courts. The thesis consists of two main parts. First part deals with explaining of three basic Acta Reus of crimes of failure to provide assistance, their common features and their differences. First chapter and its sub-chapters discuss problematic areas related to cases of failure to provide assistance. These include: the general and special duty to rescue; attempts of rescue in cases of failure to provide assistance; and questions related to committing of other crimes concurrently with failure to provide assistance. Furthermore, the first chapter explains the most important concept in questions of failure to provide assistance which is the concept of 'duty to rescue'. It goes on to explain additional concepts such as 'endangering oneself or others', 'profession-based duty to rescue', 'damage to health', 'vehicle driver' and 'traffic collision'. The first part of thesis is concluded with overview of changes in Czech (and Czechoslovakian) legislation since 1950 related to crimes of failure to provide assistance. Second part is dedicated to court case law, systematically divided by their major topic into five chapters. These chapters and...

Protection of personality rights of individuals and the protection of reputation, name and privacy of legal persons in media, including case law analysis Abstract The thesis deals with the issue of protection of personality rights of individuals as well as personal rights of legal persons in media. Current decision-making practice of the European Court of Human Rights and Czech courts shall be considered as integral to this thesis. The thesis analyses not only theoretical questions relating personality rights of individuals and personal rights of legal persons, but it also reflects practical repercussions on legal remedies. It focuses mainly on reasonable compensation, defamation as well as the right to reply and supplementary statement. With regard to theme's timeliness the thesis also reflects on legal framework of exemption from internet service provider's liability in so-called new media under the Act No. 480/2004 Sb., about Certain Services of Information Companies, as subsequently amended. The thesis is divided into seven chapters and thematically related subheadings, and its introduction and final part. The first chapter defines the essential terms relating personality rights, personal rights and media. The second chapter provides the overview of relevant sources of law. The third chapter defines...

O conceito de precedente judicial é fundamental não apenas nos países de common law, mas também nos de civil law. Essa dicotomia está enfraquecida, de modo que os precedentes, na condição de normas jurídicas construídas de casos concretos, devem ser tidos como vinculantes em ambos os sistemas. Precedente não se confunde com uma decisão judicial proferida no passado, mas, sim, com razões de decidir extraídas de decisões colegiadas pretéritas. Não são todas as Cortes do Brasil competentes para a produção de precedentes, mas apenas os tribunais com a atribuição de dar a última palavra sobre a interpretação do Direito. A produção contínua de precedentes pelas Cortes competentes dá origem a sistemas normativos. Os precedentes extraídos de acórdãos do Supremo Tribunal Federal e do Superior Tribunal de Justiça formam o sistema nacional de precedentes. Nos estados e regiões (Justiça Federal) formam-se subsistemas de jurisprudência vinculante e de definição de sentido do “direito local”. Existe uma relação inexorável entre sistemas normativos e a ideia de coerência. Os sistemas devem ser coerentes. Coerência não se limita à imposição de que sejam evitadas contradições entre as normas. É preciso que critérios de coerência sejam construídos com o objetivo de impor deveres relacionados à fundamentação de cada nova norma que ingressa no sistema. As decisões judiciais devem apresentar justificação interna e justificação externa. Os fundamentos dos precedentes encontram-se na justificação externa da decisão. A coerência impõe, portanto, limites ao intérprete no que se refere a determinadas escolhas relacionadas à justificação externa. A eleição dos argumentos interpretativos utilizados na construção de um novo precedente deve ter como parâmetro o sistema de precedentes. Da mesma forma, os conceitos jurídicos utilizados na formação da normaprecedente devem ter o sistema de precedentes como referência. Por uma imposição de coerência normativa, os conteúdos atribuídos pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal aos princípios constitucionais devem, necessariamente, ser observados. A coerência consta em texto de lei federal brasileira (novo Código de Processo Civil), tendo, assim, status de norma federal, mais especificamente, de um postulado hermenêutico (norma de segundo grau). Diante do caráter normativo, deve ser observada fielmente pelas Cortes competentes para a elaboração de precedentes. Sua inobservância pode ser enfrentada pelas partes imediatamente interessadas, por meio da interposição de recurso de embargos de divergência ou, ainda, por meio de recurso especial quando o desrespeito se der pelas Cortes de Justiça. O controle ainda deve ocorrer de ofício pelas próprias Cortes de precedentes, haja vista o caráter cogente da norma, o que poderá ensejar o overruling. / The concept of precedent is fundamental not only in common law systems but also in civil law systems. This dichotomy is dimmed, since, as legal rules built on concrete cases, precedents must be considered binding on in both systems. Precedents do not relate to the decisions issued in the past, but rather to the reasoning extracted from previous Court decisions. In Brazil, only the Courts with the attribution of giving the last word on the interpretation of the Law have competence to rule precedents. The continuous making of precedents by competent Courts gives rise to normative systems. The precedents resultant from judgments of the Federal Supreme Court and the Superior Court of Justice form the national system of precedents. At local level, it is the States (State Tribunals) and in the Federal Regions (Federal Regional Tribunals) that form the binding jurisprudence systems and the definition of "local law". There is an indispensable bond between normative systems and the idea of coherence. Normative systems must be coherent. Coherence is not limited to avoiding contradictions between legal standards. Coherence criteria shall be developed on the purpose of guiding the reasoning of every new legal standard that enters the system. Judicial decisions must present internal and external justification. Grounds for precedents are found in the external justification of the decision. Coherence therefore requires the interpreter limits to adopt reasons for external justification. The arguments chosen to substantiate new precedent must be ground on the system of precedents. Likewise, the legal concepts used to holdup precedents also should stand on the precedent system. By imposition of normative coherence, the contents attributed by the Federal Supreme Court to the constitutional principles must be observed. Coherence is provided by the Brazilian federal law (new Code of Civil Procedure) and therefore has the status of a federal rule and, specifically, a hermeneutical postulate (second degree rule). As formal law, coherence is required to be observed by competent Courts while issuing precedents. The affected parties by the noncompliance with coherence can challenge it through a Motion for Resolution of Conflict in Decision or a Special Appeal, in its case when the disregard comes from Courts of Justice. Given that coherence is mandatory, the Courts with competence to issue precedent must examine its compliance ex officio, which may lead to overruling.

O conceito de precedente judicial é fundamental não apenas nos países de common law, mas também nos de civil law. Essa dicotomia está enfraquecida, de modo que os precedentes, na condição de normas jurídicas construídas de casos concretos, devem ser tidos como vinculantes em ambos os sistemas. Precedente não se confunde com uma decisão judicial proferida no passado, mas, sim, com razões de decidir extraídas de decisões colegiadas pretéritas. Não são todas as Cortes do Brasil competentes para a produção de precedentes, mas apenas os tribunais com a atribuição de dar a última palavra sobre a interpretação do Direito. A produção contínua de precedentes pelas Cortes competentes dá origem a sistemas normativos. Os precedentes extraídos de acórdãos do Supremo Tribunal Federal e do Superior Tribunal de Justiça formam o sistema nacional de precedentes. Nos estados e regiões (Justiça Federal) formam-se subsistemas de jurisprudência vinculante e de definição de sentido do “direito local”. Existe uma relação inexorável entre sistemas normativos e a ideia de coerência. Os sistemas devem ser coerentes. Coerência não se limita à imposição de que sejam evitadas contradições entre as normas. É preciso que critérios de coerência sejam construídos com o objetivo de impor deveres relacionados à fundamentação de cada nova norma que ingressa no sistema. As decisões judiciais devem apresentar justificação interna e justificação externa. Os fundamentos dos precedentes encontram-se na justificação externa da decisão. A coerência impõe, portanto, limites ao intérprete no que se refere a determinadas escolhas relacionadas à justificação externa. A eleição dos argumentos interpretativos utilizados na construção de um novo precedente deve ter como parâmetro o sistema de precedentes. Da mesma forma, os conceitos jurídicos utilizados na formação da normaprecedente devem ter o sistema de precedentes como referência. Por uma imposição de coerência normativa, os conteúdos atribuídos pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal aos princípios constitucionais devem, necessariamente, ser observados. A coerência consta em texto de lei federal brasileira (novo Código de Processo Civil), tendo, assim, status de norma federal, mais especificamente, de um postulado hermenêutico (norma de segundo grau). Diante do caráter normativo, deve ser observada fielmente pelas Cortes competentes para a elaboração de precedentes. Sua inobservância pode ser enfrentada pelas partes imediatamente interessadas, por meio da interposição de recurso de embargos de divergência ou, ainda, por meio de recurso especial quando o desrespeito se der pelas Cortes de Justiça. O controle ainda deve ocorrer de ofício pelas próprias Cortes de precedentes, haja vista o caráter cogente da norma, o que poderá ensejar o overruling. / The concept of precedent is fundamental not only in common law systems but also in civil law systems. This dichotomy is dimmed, since, as legal rules built on concrete cases, precedents must be considered binding on in both systems. Precedents do not relate to the decisions issued in the past, but rather to the reasoning extracted from previous Court decisions. In Brazil, only the Courts with the attribution of giving the last word on the interpretation of the Law have competence to rule precedents. The continuous making of precedents by competent Courts gives rise to normative systems. The precedents resultant from judgments of the Federal Supreme Court and the Superior Court of Justice form the national system of precedents. At local level, it is the States (State Tribunals) and in the Federal Regions (Federal Regional Tribunals) that form the binding jurisprudence systems and the definition of "local law". There is an indispensable bond between normative systems and the idea of coherence. Normative systems must be coherent. Coherence is not limited to avoiding contradictions between legal standards. Coherence criteria shall be developed on the purpose of guiding the reasoning of every new legal standard that enters the system. Judicial decisions must present internal and external justification. Grounds for precedents are found in the external justification of the decision. Coherence therefore requires the interpreter limits to adopt reasons for external justification. The arguments chosen to substantiate new precedent must be ground on the system of precedents. Likewise, the legal concepts used to holdup precedents also should stand on the precedent system. By imposition of normative coherence, the contents attributed by the Federal Supreme Court to the constitutional principles must be observed. Coherence is provided by the Brazilian federal law (new Code of Civil Procedure) and therefore has the status of a federal rule and, specifically, a hermeneutical postulate (second degree rule). As formal law, coherence is required to be observed by competent Courts while issuing precedents. The affected parties by the noncompliance with coherence can challenge it through a Motion for Resolution of Conflict in Decision or a Special Appeal, in its case when the disregard comes from Courts of Justice. Given that coherence is mandatory, the Courts with competence to issue precedent must examine its compliance ex officio, which may lead to overruling.