La notion de partie comportant de nombreuses incertitudes, tant théoriques que pratiques, l'objet de cette thèse est de proposer une approche renouvelée de cette notion, en ne recherchant pas seulement quels sont les critères de détermination de la qualité de partie mais aussi quelles sont les personnes ayant vocation à disposer de cette qualité procédurale, car beaucoup de problèmes entourant cette notion nécessitent de pouvoir répondre à cette dernière interrogation. Il est ressorti de cette étude que le respect du principe selon lequel nul ne peut être jugé sans avoir été mis en mesure de se défendre impose que toute personne susceptible d'être jugée ait la qualité de partie, et que, sauf exceptions, le respect du devoir de non-immixtion dans les affaires d'autrui et de l'objectif de bonne administration de la justice implique de ne pas octroyer la qualité de partie à d'autres personnes que celles susceptibles d'être jugées. Dès lors, nous avons pu vérifier si les personnes étant parties ou tiers étaient légitimes à l'être et proposer, lorsque tel n'était pas le cas, des solutions pour y remédier. En outre, en analysant à la lumière de l'approche centrée sur la vocation à être partie les divers cas posant des difficultés de qualification procédurale, nous avons pu démontrer que les catégories de tiers et de parties ne nécessitent pas d'être complétées de classifications intermédiaires. En revanche, étudier isolément chaque situation à l'aune de cette nouvelle approche a permis de faire en sorte, pour tous ces cas jusqu'alors incertains, que chaque personne dispose de la qualité procédurale et des prérogatives auxquelles elle pouvait légitimement prétendre. / No English summary available.

Civil disputes between doctor and patient in medical healthcare The issue of civil disputes between doctor and patient in medical healthcare is characterized by a high degree of interdependence of substantive and procedural questions. The main issue here is inequality between doctor and patient in their relationship, which is based more on factual inequality than inequality in rights. The patient as consumer and therefore the weaker party has limited access to relevant information concerning the subject of the relationship between doctor and patient. On the other hand, a doctor is a subject which has in its power almost all the relevant information. As can be seen, for a given relationship is characteristic a high degree of inequality of information. This inequality, which arises in the relationship always, is not sufficiently addressed by the substantive regulation and its effects are present in subsequent court proceedings in the form of an information deficit. Intention of this paper is to present the fundamentals of the relationship between physician and patient, the reasons for the information deficit and its consequences in legal proceedings and ways of its compensation. The aim is to assess whether the current regulation is to ensure equality between doctor and patient with emphasis on the...

Sandoriai patvirtinti galinų telekomunikacinių įrenginių ir el.pašto pagalba yra neatsiejama komercinės teisės dalis. Lyginant tarptautinius ir Lietuvos teisės aktus, nagrinėjami galimi tokių sandorių formos trūkumai bei jų, kaip rašytinių įrodymų reikšmė civiliniame teismo procese. / This magistrates thesis deals with theoretical and practical aspects of validity of transactions (contracts, confirmed by telecommunications and e-mails, particularly in its form. The purpose of this work was to analyse the possible lack of requisitions of such transactions. According to Lithuanian Civil Code Art. 1.71.2: documents signed by the parties and transmitted by means of telegraph, facsimile communication or over any other means of communication terminal equipment shall be conferred the same power as having been made in the written form, providing the protection of the text is guaranteed and the signature can be identified.

This thesis titled "Notarial deed with declaration of enforceability" deals with the specific type of notarial deed, which is also enforceable title for enforcement procedure. It is a special type of notarial deed, whose tradition dates back to the 19th century. The aim of this work is to describe notarial deed with declaration of enforceability from the perspective of civil proceedings because it is the legal instrument, which for its flexibility, can in practice, replace Court Judgments. This thesis is divided into five chapters. The first chapter contains a brief historical development of notarial deeds with declaration of enforceability since its adoption into legal system in 1871 to the present. The second chapter deals with notarial deeds as authentic instruments, as well as notarial deeds on legal acts and then by each type of notarial deed with declaration of enforceability, including notarial deed as European Enforcement Order and relationship between the notarial deed with declaration of enforceability and civil adversarial proceedings. The third chapter focuses on notarial deed with declaration of enforceability as title for enforcement procedure and subsequently reviews of a notarial deed within enforcement procedure. The fourth chapter of thesis deals with notaries' responsibility for...

Le principe dispositif est le principe directeur du procès civil qui consacre la maîtrise par les parties de leur litige. Da mihi factum, dabo tibi jus ; l’adage est classique. Tandis que l’office des parties serait d’apporter les faits, le juge devrait dire le droit. L’évolution de la procédure civile semble cependant traduire une remise en cause de cet équilibre ainsi qu’en témoignent le développement du principe de coopération et l’avènement du principe de juridiction. Pour autant, il est permis de considérer que ce n’est pas tant le principe dispositif qui est en cause que les analyses qui en ont été faites. Le litige est toujours la chose des parties, seulement la conceptualisation traditionnelle qui est attachée au principe ne permet plus de s’en convaincre. L’objet de l’étude est donc de procéder au renouvellement des analyses faites du principe dispositif afin de mettre en évidence que ce dernier peut prétendre, comme l’avait écrit Motulsky, à l’épithète de fondamental. Pour ce faire, il convient tout d’abord de procéder au renouvellement de l’analyse de sa fonction. Le principe dispositif n’est pas un principe de l’instance mais une garantie de la fonction juridictionnelle, qui consacre l’office des parties, non pas quant aux charges processuelles, mais quant aux demandes. Cette analyse amène alors à renouveler celle relative à sa nature. La qualification de principe directeur doit être abandonnée au profit de celle de droit fondamental, droit fondamental qui devrait faire l’objet d’une constitutionnalisation. L’étude permet ainsi de conclure que le fait ne s’oppose pas au droit, mais est source de droit. Derrière la maxime da mihi factum, dabo tibi jus, il faut entendre donne-moi le fait juridique, je te donnerai la norme juridictionnelle. / The principle of party disposition is the civil trial guiding principle which enshrines the power, for the parties, of having their own litigation under control. Da mihi factum, dabo tibi jus is a well-known adage. The judge should interpret the law while the parties’ role would be to bring the facts to him.However, the civil proceeding evolution seems to show a reconsideration of this balance, as reflected by the development of the principle of cooperation and the emergence of the principle of jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the main matter might not be the principle of party disposition but the analysis that were done. The parties are still exercising sole control over their own litigation but the classical conceptualization of the principle of party disposition is making some doubts appear. The purpose of the study consists in renewing all analysis on the principle of party disposition in order to highlight his “fundamental” character, as Motulsky wrote it. In order to achieve this, the first thing to do is renewing the analysis on its function. The principle of party disposition is not a principle of the trial but a guarantee for the jurisdictional function, which enshrines the role of the parties regarding requests, not procedural charges. This study leads to renew the analysis on the nature of the principle of party disposition. The guiding principle designation must be dropped out and replaced by the fundamental right one, which should be enshrined in the Constitution. The conclusion of the study may be that facts and law are not opposed; in the contrary, facts are a source of law. The Da mihi factum, dabo tibi jus adage must be understood as tell me what the legal fact is, I will tell you what the law states.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-15T19:34:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Viviane Aparecida Fernandes Pontes.pdf: 894053 bytes, checksum: 7bc3f31c5ab646aa624871ed412116fb (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-02-10 / The traditional Civil Procedure Law, which is mainly individualistic, has not been able to provide proper answers to class suits that multiply in the mass society we live in. Because of that, it is necessary to study Class Proceeding Law, once it allows a more reasonable and less formal treatment of the conflicts among groups, classes or categories of people. Consequently, Class Proceeding Law may permit, in a conclusive way, that Justice can be effectively reached by citizens, through the defeat of individualistic dogmas that take place between Brazilian Civil Procedure Law and enhance social unequality. / O direito processual civil tradicional, de vocação eminentemente individualista, não tem conseguido oferecer respostas satisfatórias às demandas coletivas que se multiplicam na sociedade de massa em que vivemos. Diante disso, mostra-se necessário o estudo da tutela jurisdicional coletiva, que permite um tratamento mais racionalizado e menos formalista dos conflitos de grupos, classes ou categorias de pessoas, característicos dos direitos transindividuais. Por conseguinte, a coletivização do processo civil pode influir, decisivamente, no efetivo acesso dos cidadãos à Justiça, por intermédio da derrubada dos dogmas individualistas que permeiam o Processo Civil Brasileiro e acentuam as desigualdades sociais.