Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:29:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Flavia Batista Viana.pdf: 1915368 bytes, checksum: 79630d4c574807c29d9309d11a82fe4b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-06-18 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This study aims to demonstrate the foundations that support the place of defendant class actions in the Brazilian legal system despite any legislative amendment. For both, were prepared and legal research literatures, using inductive methods, historical and comparative, so that, by national and foreign literature, could be considered the most important reasons to validate the place of collective actions passive. The first chapter is devoted to an overview of class actions from the Ancient Age to the present day to explain why the defendant class action was not developed. It was foreshorten a brief history on the subject in law the U.S. and Brazil, and on this, were still addressed the aspects which are the main theme. The second chapter is an overview of the mapping class actions in several orders foreign to demonstrate that the relevance of the issue is not exclusively Brazilian. Even were moot the concept and some classifications of defendant class actions, and were presented the foundations of several orders that support the defense of defendant class actions in our country without any legislative change. The last chapter focused on the analysis of some procedural issues crucial to the place of defendant class actions, such as adequacy of representation and the res judicata, and the proposals of legal rules for defendant class actions / O presente trabalho tem por objetivo demonstrar os fundamentos que respaldam o cabimento das ações coletivas passivas no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro a despeito de qualquer alteração legislativa. Para tanto, foram elaboradas pesquisas bibliográfica e jurisprudencial, utilizando-se dos métodos indutivo, histórico e comparativo, para que, por meio da literatura especializada nacional e estrangeira, pudessem ser analisados os fundamentos mais relevantes para validar o cabimento das ações coletivas passivas. O primeiro capítulo é destinado a fazer um apanhado geral das ações coletivas desde a Idade Antiga até os dias atuais a fim de explicar por que a ação coletiva passiva não foi adequadamente desenvolvida. Também foi realizado um breve escorço histórico sobre o tema na legislação norte-americana e brasileira, e, quanto a esta, ainda foram abordadas as principais nuances que revestem o tema. No segundo capítulo foi traçado um panorama geral das ações coletivas passivas em vários ordenamentos jurídicos alienígenas para demonstrar que a relevância do tema não é exclusividade brasileira. Ainda foram trazidos à baila o conceito e algumas classificações das ações coletivas passivas, bem como foram apresentados os fundamentos de diversas ordens que sustentam a defesa das ações coletivas passivas em nosso ordenamento sem nenhuma alteração legislativa. O último capítulo centrou-se na análise de algumas questões processuais determinantes para o cabimento das ações coletivas passivas, como é o caso da representação adequada e da coisa julgada, bem como das propostas legais de regramento para as ações coletivas passivas

Role of Plea Bargainingin the US The aim of this thesis is to explain to the reader the term Plea Bargaining, to explain the principles of this legal institute and its role in the penal system of the United States of America. The Author does not only describe the Plea Bargaining, but also analyses the institute thoroughly, accenting its positive and negative aspects, considering the point of view of the particular participants of the process. Last but not least, the thesis contains the author's critical evaluation. The institute of Plea Bargaining appears in the common law system from the second half of the nineteenth century, while evincing a quantitative growth in the long term. Currently, it is being used in the absolute majority of penal proceedings, and a change in this trend can in no way be expected in the closest future - therefore, this institute shall be considered as absolutely indispensable for the law of the United States of America. Despite its wide use, its application also gives rise to negative emotions. Relatively often, there are opinions appearing, questioning its legitimacy and legality, for Plea Bargaining is not regulated in the statute law and is not only directly contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America, but also to multiple international treaties on...

Globally, the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries has been a period of major reforms in criminal law which are connected with the effort to find new methods to deal with crime and to replace or at least complement some inflexible procedures in administration of criminal cases. More and more attention is being paid to alternative proceedings before the court and alternative punishments in criminal cases. The Czech Republic has not fallen behind in the developments. My work seeks to map the options of alternative punishments, with a focus on community service. My work also deals with the legal framework for punishments in form of community service in selected countries. I will also mention the institute of Probation and Mediation Service. The work also points to the prepared amendment to the Criminal Code in connection with community service punishments. The research in my work is divided into two parts. The first part is a quantitative survey of opinions of the general public and the other part is a qualitative survey of opinions of professionals, such as judges, policemen and officers of the Probation and Mediation Service. The main objective of the work is to learn about the general public attitudes to and awareness of application and implementation of alternative punishments. I tried to find out which punishments would be preferred by the general public. Another objective of this work has been to survey opinions of professionals in respect to application and implementation of alternative punishments. In the first survey three of my hypotheses have been confirmed and two have been disconfirmed. Based on results of the secod part of the survey I have devised three hypotheses. The results of my work have shown that although the general public has a certain level of awareness of the issue, the knowledge is very superficial. The general public has demonstrated a significant degree of tolerance and benevolence to persons with alternative punishments. Professionals mostly approve the existing legal framework for the alternative punishments. They find the definition of these punishments in the Criminal Code adequate and they believe that alternative punishments have been used sufficiently. The work will serve as a general overview of the issue.

Magister Legum - LLM

Cyberspace produces friction when the law is implemented by domestic courts using 'state-laws'. These laws are based on a ‘physical presence’ of an individual within the territory. It elevates conflicts relating to cyberspace jurisdiction. This research examines private international law complications associated with cyberspace. The paradigm of libel that takes place within the domain of social media is used to evaluate the utility of traditional laws. This research is conducted using ‘black-letter’ methodology, keeping in mind the changes constituted by the Defamation Act 2013. It pinpoints that the instantaneous nature of social media communication demands an unambiguous exercise of 'personal-jurisdiction', beyond the doctrine of territoriality. An innovation to the code of Civil Procedure is recommended to revise the process of service for non-EU defendants. The permission to serve a writ via social networks (or to the relevant Embassy of the defendant’s domicile state), can accelerate the traditional judicial process. This thesis can be utilised as a roadmap by libel victims for preliminary information. It contributes to the knowledge by discovering that the thresholds under Section 1 and Section 9 of the Defamation Act 2013 overlap with the conventional ‘forum-conveniens’ tests. This crossover is causing legal uncertainty in the application of existing rules to the digital libel proceedings. Section 1 and Section 9 thresholds do not fulfil the purpose of eliminating ‘libel-tourism’ and maintaining a balance between speech freedom and reputation rights. They raised the bar for potential victims and restricted their rights to justice. It is proposed that the traditional ‘conveniens test’ must be used for social media libel victims to produce legal certainty in cyberspace defamation.

A presente dissertação tem por objetivo o estudo da aplicação do princípio da congruência no Processo Individual do Trabalho. Tal princípio caracteriza-se pelo caráter restritivo da atuação judicial, vinculando a prolação de sentença aos limites da lide. A problemática centra-se no entendimento do conceito de lide, ora entendido simplesmente como pedido, ora como a matéria fática e jurídica levada aos autos, permitindo-se ao magistrado conhecer de pedidos não formulados expressamente, desde que os fatos a eles pertinentes tenham sido discutidos nos autos. A partir da Teoria Instrumentalista do Processo, que admite este modo de resolução de conflitos como um meio para a efetividade do Direito Material, buscou-se identificar a possibilidade de flexibilização do princípio da congruência no Processo Individual do Trabalho, tendo em vista que o estudo deste princípio revelou que a doutrina e a jurisprudência civil e trabalhista já permitem sua relativização ou mitigação em determinados casos, em especial quando se trata da aplicação de norma de ordem pública, uma das características do Direito Material do Trabalho. Ademais, considerando as questões linguísticas implicadas na formulação da pretensão da parte e da sentença, foi feita pesquisa jurisprudencial no sítio eletrônico do Tribunal Superior do Trabalho, de modo a identificar as relações hermenêuticas estabelecidas entre o pedido e a decisão final neste tribunal. Para tanto, foram selecionadas 149 decisões em que se discute a existência ou não de julgamento além dos limites da lide, destacando-se os casos em que o tribunal considerou desnecessária a formulação de pedido expresso para a concessão de direito trabalhista / The purpose of this dissertation is to study the use of the Principle of Ne Ultra et Extra Petita in individual labor process. This principle is defined by the restrictive aspect of the acts of the judge, binding the sentence to the matters under dispute. The core discussion lies on the identification of such matters, which can be seen as simply the pleadings expressed by the parties or as all the matters in connection with the facts merely mentioned by them. The latter position would allow the judicial authority to pronounce a sentence addressing additional matters that were not expressly pleaded by the parties. Based on the idea that the due process of law is an instrument to achieve effectiveness of legal commands, on the already accepted exception of this principle when it comes to public order rules, and also on the assumption that labor law is of public order, this dissertation analyzed the possibility of disregarding the Principle of Ne Ultra et Extra Petita in individual labor process in order to enhance the legal award. In addition to the theoretical analysis, a wide research on the website of the superior labor court (Tribunal Superior do Trabalho) was carried out in order to verify the hermeneutical relations between the pleadings and the dispositions of the judicial decision. Bearing such an objective in mind, 149 decisions on the alleged violation of the Principle of Ne Ultra et Extra Petita were selected and analyzed, focusing on those awards in which the court considered irrelevant the existence of an express pleading in order to grant or deny a specific labor right.

A presente dissertação tem por objetivo o estudo da aplicação do princípio da congruência no Processo Individual do Trabalho. Tal princípio caracteriza-se pelo caráter restritivo da atuação judicial, vinculando a prolação de sentença aos limites da lide. A problemática centra-se no entendimento do conceito de lide, ora entendido simplesmente como pedido, ora como a matéria fática e jurídica levada aos autos, permitindo-se ao magistrado conhecer de pedidos não formulados expressamente, desde que os fatos a eles pertinentes tenham sido discutidos nos autos. A partir da Teoria Instrumentalista do Processo, que admite este modo de resolução de conflitos como um meio para a efetividade do Direito Material, buscou-se identificar a possibilidade de flexibilização do princípio da congruência no Processo Individual do Trabalho, tendo em vista que o estudo deste princípio revelou que a doutrina e a jurisprudência civil e trabalhista já permitem sua relativização ou mitigação em determinados casos, em especial quando se trata da aplicação de norma de ordem pública, uma das características do Direito Material do Trabalho. Ademais, considerando as questões linguísticas implicadas na formulação da pretensão da parte e da sentença, foi feita pesquisa jurisprudencial no sítio eletrônico do Tribunal Superior do Trabalho, de modo a identificar as relações hermenêuticas estabelecidas entre o pedido e a decisão final neste tribunal. Para tanto, foram selecionadas 149 decisões em que se discute a existência ou não de julgamento além dos limites da lide, destacando-se os casos em que o tribunal considerou desnecessária a formulação de pedido expresso para a concessão de direito trabalhista / The purpose of this dissertation is to study the use of the Principle of Ne Ultra et Extra Petita in individual labor process. This principle is defined by the restrictive aspect of the acts of the judge, binding the sentence to the matters under dispute. The core discussion lies on the identification of such matters, which can be seen as simply the pleadings expressed by the parties or as all the matters in connection with the facts merely mentioned by them. The latter position would allow the judicial authority to pronounce a sentence addressing additional matters that were not expressly pleaded by the parties. Based on the idea that the due process of law is an instrument to achieve effectiveness of legal commands, on the already accepted exception of this principle when it comes to public order rules, and also on the assumption that labor law is of public order, this dissertation analyzed the possibility of disregarding the Principle of Ne Ultra et Extra Petita in individual labor process in order to enhance the legal award. In addition to the theoretical analysis, a wide research on the website of the superior labor court (Tribunal Superior do Trabalho) was carried out in order to verify the hermeneutical relations between the pleadings and the dispositions of the judicial decision. Bearing such an objective in mind, 149 decisions on the alleged violation of the Principle of Ne Ultra et Extra Petita were selected and analyzed, focusing on those awards in which the court considered irrelevant the existence of an express pleading in order to grant or deny a specific labor right.

The theme of my diploma thesis is the efficiency of the probation supervision of the system of justice. My aim is to inform wheather and in which way the probation supervision helps to reduce the risk of crime's relapse. This diploma thesis is divided into two parts. The first one is theoretical whereas the second one is practical. In the theoretical paragraph I explain the aims and reasons of probation supervision. The wide scope of taking advantages of this care is also mentioned. I describe all activities connected with the above. The pecularities of youngters's probation supervision are pointe dout, as well. Last but not least I inform about the course of the probation supervision and try to compare alternative sanctions to the imprisonment. A statistic survey of probation supervision in last few years makes a part of my thesis, too. The second part of my thesis is based on my practice in the centre of probation and mediation care. I mention the results of my research among the members of the working team in the above organisation and social worker's for youngsters and adults. I inform about their points of view of this care and connected probléme and thein cooperation. The next paragraph show the way of life of several clients of probation and mediation care. I inform about their situation, crime,...

Cette thèse a pour objet l'obligation de sécurité en matière la responsabilité contractuelle à la lumière du droit français et du droit libyen. La recherche tend à répondre aux questions suivantes : Qu'entend-on par sécurité des produits médicaux ? Sur quel fondement juridique peut-on justifier cette obligation ? Quelles sont les difficultés d'application de cette obligation pour traiter les problèmes de produits de santé ? C'est quoi le produits de santé ? Et Le droit de la responsabilité civile libyen est-il parfaitement adapté à la protection de la victime des produits de santé comme dans le droit de la responsabilité français ? Ce questionnement a conduit l'auteur à développer une analyse approfondie de l'obligation de sécurité en manière de la responsabilité contractuelle et le droit de la santé français et libyen. Dans la première partie de la thèse, on constate que la notion d'obligation de sécurité, y compris en matière de la responsabilité contractuelle, a connu une évolution majeure par rapport à l'époque précédant. En fait, l'apparition de la notion d'obligation de sécurité est ancienne puisqu'elle a été créée en France le 21 novembre 1911 à l'occasion du contrat de transport. Elle peut être définie comme « l'obligation de veiller à la sécurité d'une personne ou d'un bien, qui peut être une obligation de résultat ou de moyen ». Certains codes du monde proche-oriental ont adopté la résolution que la Cour de cassation française a prise en 1911 dans le domaine du transport de personnes, comme l'Egypte et le Liban. En 1956, la Cour d'Appel à Alexandrie a conformé l'obligation de sécurité dans le domaine du transport de personnes / This thesis focuses on the safety obligation regarding contractual liability in the light of French law and Libyan law. Research tends to answer the following questions: What is safety of medical products? On what legal basis can we justify that obligation? What are the difficulties in applying this requirement to address issues of health products? What is the health products? The law and civil liability Libya is it perfectly suited to the protection of the victim of health products as in the French liability law? This questioning has led the author to develop a thorough analysis of the safety obligation by way of contractual liability and health law French and Libyan. In the first part of the thesis, we see that the notion of bond security, including with respect to contractual liability, has experienced a major change from the time before. In fact, the emergence of the concept of safety obligation is old since it was founded in France 21 November 1911 at the contract of carriage. It can be defined as "the obligation to ensure the safety of any person or property which may be an obligation of result or means." Some codes of Near Eastern world have adopted the resolution that the French Supreme Court has taken in 1911 in the transportation of persons, such as Egypt and Lebanon. In 1956, the Appeal Court in Alexandria has complied with the requirement of safety in the transportation of persons. Similarly, in Lebanon in the Code of Obligations and Contracts provides in Article 688 that the contract of carriage of persons is the responsibility of the carrier's obligation to lead the traveler, unharmed, to the destination

<p>Дискурс анализа је интердисциплинарно подручје истраживања које<br />посматра језик као делатност. Она се бави питањима разговора и текста и то тако<br />што је фокус пажње подједнако и на саговорницима, и на контексту, и на<br />вербалној поруци.<br />Њу у домаћу академску заједницу уводи Свенка Савић, најпре у оквиру<br />наставе на основним студијама Одсека за српски језик и лингвистику<br />Филозофског факултета у Новом Саду. За овај предмет на Универзитету у Новом<br />Саду објављује уџбеник под називом Дискурс анализа (1993) и формира, заједно<br />са бројним сарадницама, пројекат &bdquo;Новосадски корпус разговорног српског<br />језика&rdquo;. Осим на Одсеку за српски језик и лингвистику, данас се анализа<br />дискурса као наставни предмет изучава и на Одсеку за журналистику и<br />делимично на Одсеку за англистику.<br />Крајем 20. и почетком 21. века у анализи говорних и писаних облика<br />дискурса јавља се нов приступ проучавања под називом критичка анализа<br />дискурса (КАД). У оквиру критичке анализе дискурса, истраживачи се највише<br />баве приказом демонстрације моћи, контроле и друштвених неједнакости у<br />различитим институцијама, а једну такву институцију представља и суд.<br />Примену у истраживању дискурсних особина разговора у суду значајније<br />видимо у радовима са енглеског говорног подручја, док су друга језичка<br />подручја мање истражена. Предмет проучавања ових радова су различите<br />граматичке и дискурсне какрактеристике разговора у суду, као што су: употреба<br />номинализација, пасива и техничких термина током размена у судском поступку<br />(Gibbons, 1999), доминантан положај судије/пороте у простору суднице као и<br />демонстрацију моћи првенством права говорења током судског поступка<br />(Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), анализа типова питања током судског поступка и њихова улога<br />у усмеравању исказа учесника (Cotterill, 2003).<br />У литератури на српском језику радови који се баве правном и судском<br />проблематиком у фокусу пажње углавном имају текст &ndash; писани облик судског<br />дискурса, који се манифестује кроз законе и разне прописе у којима се закон примењује (Јанићијевић, 2010) или се баве одликама жанра текста судских</p><p>пресуда (Макевић, 2014), а мали је број радова који се баве особинама разговора<br />у суду током судског поступка (Јанковић, 2002).<br />Предмет овог рада јесу особине дискурса разговора у суду (ДРС). Термин<br />дискурс разговора у суду подразумева онај тип разговора у којем се један<br />(раз)говорни догађај остварује просторно у јавној сфери (у судници), у којој<br />учествује више особа са одређеним социјалним и дискурсним улогама. У центру<br />пажње су дискурсне стратегије током размена судије са другим учесницима у<br />судском поступку током судске расправе, са посебним освртом на интеракцију<br />између судије и (оп)туженог.<br />Циљ овог истраживања је да се анализира, опише и објасни дискурс судске<br />праксе у институцији суда у Србији и покажу односи друштвене моћи<br />саговорника укључених у судску расправу.<br />Хипотеза је да ће анализа разговора судије са (оп)туженим бити добар<br />показатељ начина на који се у суду спроводе у праксу законодавне одредбе<br />(о дискриминацији, равноправности и сл.) и како се интерпретира друштвена<br />моћ.<br />Теоријско-методолошки оквир коришћен у овом раду је у сагласности са<br />анализом употребе језика, са језичком делатности, пре свега са учењем<br />холандског лингвисте Тојнa ван Дајка (Van Dijk, 2009) о моћи, и у сагласности с<br />теоријом учтивости Пенелопи Браун и Стивена Левинсона (Brown and Levinson,<br />1987). Обе теорије прати дескриптивни приказ одабраних узорака емпиријског<br />материјала.<br />У раду користим метод прикупљања и анализе материјала устаљен у<br />анализи дискурса (Савић, 1993). Емпиријски материјал представља узорак од 9<br />судских расправа из два временска периода: 4 судске расправе снимљене 1991.<br />године и 5 судских расправа снимљених након 24 године (2015). Укупно је<br />снимљено 180,13 минута разговора, односно 140 страна текста трансркибованог<br />у писану форму припремљену за анализу. Јединице анализе су речи, размене и<br />параграфи (Савић, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />Резултати истраживања показују да је у разговору у суду доминантна улога<br />суткиње, која има институционално дату моћ да води судску расправу и доноси<br />решења и пресуде. Из доминантне позиције произлази и њена комуникативна и<br />друштвена моћ коју остварује применом различитих разговорних стратегија као<br />што су: стратегија постављања питања, усмеравања разговора, одређивања<br />понашања других у разговору, започињања и завршавања разговора, употреба<br />професионалне терминологије, стратегија ословљавања, извођења закључка,<br />причања прича, прекидања и преклапања разговора са саговорницима.<br />За разлику од суткиње, (оп)тужени је правни лаик са малим дискурсним<br />учинком. Његова подређена улога огледа се у стратегијама: одговарања на<br />питања, покушају усмеравања разговора, покушају постављања питања,<br />принципу сарадње, ословљавању, понављању и самопонављању, прекидању и<br />преклапању, причању приче и оклевању.<br />На основу резултата анализе судских расправа може се закључити да је<br />дискурс разговора у суду хибридни жанр. У њему се на граматичком, лексичком,<br />семантичком и прагматичком нивоу сједињавају формални писани правни<br />дискурс и неформални разговорни језик свакодневне комуникације.<br />Предлог за непосредну праксу. Потребно је успоставити успешнији модел<br />комуникације у суду током интеракција између правних стручњака (судија, јавних тужилаца, адвоката) и правних лаика: избегавањем непознате</p><p>терминoлогије, употребом једноставних реченица (избегавањем пасивне и<br />безличне конструкције и номинализације), коришћењем учтивих фраза и родно<br />осетљивог језика, како би се језик у службеној употреби у институцији суда</p><p>саобразио говору саговорника који нису део судске хијерархије.&nbsp;</p> / <p>Diskurs analiza je interdisciplinarno područje istraživanja koje<br />posmatra jezik kao delatnost. Ona se bavi pitanjima razgovora i teksta i to tako<br />što je fokus pažnje podjednako i na sagovornicima, i na kontekstu, i na<br />verbalnoj poruci.<br />NJu u domaću akademsku zajednicu uvodi Svenka Savić, najpre u okviru<br />nastave na osnovnim studijama Odseka za srpski jezik i lingvistiku<br />Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu. Za ovaj predmet na Univerzitetu u Novom<br />Sadu objavljuje udžbenik pod nazivom Diskurs analiza (1993) i formira, zajedno<br />sa brojnim saradnicama, projekat &bdquo;Novosadski korpus razgovornog srpskog<br />jezika&rdquo;. Osim na Odseku za srpski jezik i lingvistiku, danas se analiza<br />diskursa kao nastavni predmet izučava i na Odseku za žurnalistiku i<br />delimično na Odseku za anglistiku.<br />Krajem 20. i početkom 21. veka u analizi govornih i pisanih oblika<br />diskursa javlja se nov pristup proučavanja pod nazivom kritička analiza<br />diskursa (KAD). U okviru kritičke analize diskursa, istraživači se najviše<br />bave prikazom demonstracije moći, kontrole i društvenih nejednakosti u<br />različitim institucijama, a jednu takvu instituciju predstavlja i sud.<br />Primenu u istraživanju diskursnih osobina razgovora u sudu značajnije<br />vidimo u radovima sa engleskog govornog područja, dok su druga jezička<br />područja manje istražena. Predmet proučavanja ovih radova su različite<br />gramatičke i diskursne kakrakteristike razgovora u sudu, kao što su: upotreba<br />nominalizacija, pasiva i tehničkih termina tokom razmena u sudskom postupku<br />(Gibbons, 1999), dominantan položaj sudije/porote u prostoru sudnice kao i<br />demonstraciju moći prvenstvom prava govorenja tokom sudskog postupka<br />(Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), analiza tipova pitanja tokom sudskog postupka i njihova uloga<br />u usmeravanju iskaza učesnika (Cotterill, 2003).<br />U literaturi na srpskom jeziku radovi koji se bave pravnom i sudskom<br />problematikom u fokusu pažnje uglavnom imaju tekst &ndash; pisani oblik sudskog<br />diskursa, koji se manifestuje kroz zakone i razne propise u kojima se zakon primenjuje (Janićijević, 2010) ili se bave odlikama žanra teksta sudskih</p><p>presuda (Makević, 2014), a mali je broj radova koji se bave osobinama razgovora<br />u sudu tokom sudskog postupka (Janković, 2002).<br />Predmet ovog rada jesu osobine diskursa razgovora u sudu (DRS). Termin<br />diskurs razgovora u sudu podrazumeva onaj tip razgovora u kojem se jedan<br />(raz)govorni događaj ostvaruje prostorno u javnoj sferi (u sudnici), u kojoj<br />učestvuje više osoba sa određenim socijalnim i diskursnim ulogama. U centru<br />pažnje su diskursne strategije tokom razmena sudije sa drugim učesnicima u<br />sudskom postupku tokom sudske rasprave, sa posebnim osvrtom na interakciju<br />između sudije i (op)tuženog.<br />Cilj ovog istraživanja je da se analizira, opiše i objasni diskurs sudske<br />prakse u instituciji suda u Srbiji i pokažu odnosi društvene moći<br />sagovornika uključenih u sudsku raspravu.<br />Hipoteza je da će analiza razgovora sudije sa (op)tuženim biti dobar<br />pokazatelj načina na koji se u sudu sprovode u praksu zakonodavne odredbe<br />(o diskriminaciji, ravnopravnosti i sl.) i kako se interpretira društvena<br />moć.<br />Teorijsko-metodološki okvir korišćen u ovom radu je u saglasnosti sa<br />analizom upotrebe jezika, sa jezičkom delatnosti, pre svega sa učenjem<br />holandskog lingviste Tojna van Dajka (Van Dijk, 2009) o moći, i u saglasnosti s<br />teorijom učtivosti Penelopi Braun i Stivena Levinsona (Brown and Levinson,<br />1987). Obe teorije prati deskriptivni prikaz odabranih uzoraka empirijskog<br />materijala.<br />U radu koristim metod prikupljanja i analize materijala ustaljen u<br />analizi diskursa (Savić, 1993). Empirijski materijal predstavlja uzorak od 9<br />sudskih rasprava iz dva vremenska perioda: 4 sudske rasprave snimljene 1991.<br />godine i 5 sudskih rasprava snimljenih nakon 24 godine (2015). Ukupno je<br />snimljeno 180,13 minuta razgovora, odnosno 140 strana teksta transrkibovanog<br />u pisanu formu pripremljenu za analizu. Jedinice analize su reči, razmene i<br />paragrafi (Savić, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da je u razgovoru u sudu dominantna uloga<br />sutkinje, koja ima institucionalno datu moć da vodi sudsku raspravu i donosi<br />rešenja i presude. Iz dominantne pozicije proizlazi i njena komunikativna i<br />društvena moć koju ostvaruje primenom različitih razgovornih strategija kao<br />što su: strategija postavljanja pitanja, usmeravanja razgovora, određivanja<br />ponašanja drugih u razgovoru, započinjanja i završavanja razgovora, upotreba<br />profesionalne terminologije, strategija oslovljavanja, izvođenja zaključka,<br />pričanja priča, prekidanja i preklapanja razgovora sa sagovornicima.<br />Za razliku od sutkinje, (op)tuženi je pravni laik sa malim diskursnim<br />učinkom. NJegova podređena uloga ogleda se u strategijama: odgovaranja na<br />pitanja, pokušaju usmeravanja razgovora, pokušaju postavljanja pitanja,<br />principu saradnje, oslovljavanju, ponavljanju i samoponavljanju, prekidanju i<br />preklapanju, pričanju priče i oklevanju.<br />Na osnovu rezultata analize sudskih rasprava može se zaključiti da je<br />diskurs razgovora u sudu hibridni žanr. U njemu se na gramatičkom, leksičkom,<br />semantičkom i pragmatičkom nivou sjedinjavaju formalni pisani pravni<br />diskurs i neformalni razgovorni jezik svakodnevne komunikacije.<br />Predlog za neposrednu praksu. Potrebno je uspostaviti uspešniji model<br />komunikacije u sudu tokom interakcija između pravnih stručnjaka (sudija, javnih tužilaca, advokata) i pravnih laika: izbegavanjem nepoznate</p><p>terminologije, upotrebom jednostavnih rečenica (izbegavanjem pasivne i<br />bezlične konstrukcije i nominalizacije), korišćenjem učtivih fraza i rodno<br />osetljivog jezika, kako bi se jezik u službenoj upotrebi u instituciji suda</p><p>saobrazio govoru sagovornika koji nisu deo sudske hijerarhije.&nbsp;</p> / <p>Discourse analysis is an interdisciplinary research area which observes language as an activity. It deals with issues of conversation and text focusing its attention evenly on interlocutors, context and verbal message.<br />It was introduced to our academic community by Svenka Savić, firstly as teaching within undergraduate studies at Department of Serbian language and linguistics, at the Faculty of Philosophy in Novi Sad.&nbsp; She published a course book Discourse Analysis (1993) for this subject at the University of Novi Sad and established, with numerous associates, a project &bdquo;The Corpus of Novi Sad conversational Serbian language&rdquo;. Today, apart from Department of Serbian language and linguistics, discourse analysis as a subject is taught at Department of journalism and partly at Department of English language and literature.<br />At the end of the XX and the beginning of the XXI century, a new approach of analysing spoken and written forms of discourse appeared, under the name critical discourse analysis (CDA). Within CDA, the researchers mainly deal with the representation of demonstration of power, control and social inequalities in various institutions, one of which is the court.<br />Its application in the study of discourse aspects in courtroom, CDA has particularly found in the works from Anglosphere, while other language spheres have not been researched enough. The subject matter of these works are different grammatical and discourse features of talk in the courtroom such as the use of nominalization, passive construction and technical terms during judical proceedings (Gibbons, 1999), dominant position of a judge/jury in the courtroom as well as&nbsp; demonstration of power by priority turn-taking during judical proceedings (Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), analysis of types of questions during judical proceedings and their role in guiding the participants&rsquo; statements (Cotterill, 2003).<br />In the literature in Serbian language, the works dealing with legal and judical matters mainly focus on the text- written form of courtroom discourse, which manifests itself through laws and their various regulations (Janićijević, 2010) or deal with the aspects of the genre of the verdict text (Makević, 2014), and very few works deal with the aspects of talk in the courtroom during judical proceedings (Janković, 2002).</p><p>The features of courtroom discourse (CD) are the subject of this work. The term courtroom discourse means the type of talk where one spoken event is realized in spatially public sphere (in a courtroom), where several persons with different social and discourse roles participate. Discourse strategies during interaction of a judge with other participants in judical proceeding during hearing are in the spotlight, with particular reference to the interaction between the judge and the defendant/accused.<br />The aim of this research is to analyse, describe and explain the discourse of case-law in the institution of court in Serbia and to show relations of social power of participants involved in judical proceedings.<br />It is supposed that tha analysis of conversation between the judge and the defendant/accused will be an excellent indicator of the manner in which the court implements legislative provisions (оn discrimination, equality and etc.) and how social power is defined.<br />The theoretical and methodological framework in this study is in compliance with analysis of use of language, with linguistic activity, above all with the approach of Dutch linguist Teun van Dijk (2009) on power, and in accordance with the Politeness theory by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson (1987). Both thories are accompanied by descriptive review of selected examples of empirical material.<br />I have used the method of collecting and analysing material rooted in analysis of discourse (Savić, 1993). The empirical material represents nine courtroom hearings from two periods of time: 4 in 1991 and 5 courtroom hearings recorded 24 years later (2015). There are 180.13 minutes of recorded conversation, that is 140 pages of text transcribed into written form prepared for analysis. The units of analysis are words, exchanges and paragraphs (Savić, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />The results of the research show that in a courtroom discourse the role of the judge is undoubtedly dominant, having the institutionally given power to lead the hearing and reaches decisions and verdicts. Her communicative as well as social power arises from the domination which she realizes this applying various conversation strategies such as: strategy of posing questions, directing the talk, adjusting behaviour of other interlocutors, starting and ending the talk, use of professional terminology, addresssing strategy, drawing the conclusions, storytelling, interupting and overlapping the interlocutors.<br />Unlike the judge, the defendant/accused is a law layman with small discoursive contribution. Their subordinated role is reflected in the following strategies: question answering, attempting to direct the talk, attempting to pose a question, principle of cooperation, addressing, repeating and self-repeating, interupting and overlapping, storytelling and hesitating.<br />Based on the results of the analysis of the courtroom hearings, we can draw the conclusion that the courtroom discourse is rather hybrid in its genre. It represents, on grammatic, lexic, semantic and pragmatic level, merging of&nbsp; formal written legal discourse and informal spoken language of everday conversation.<br />Suggestion for direct practice. It is essential to establish more successful model of communication in a courtroom during the interaction among law experts (judges, Abstract:</p><p>AB</p><p>Discourse analysis is an interdisciplinary research area which observes language as an activity. It deals with issues of conversation and text focusing its attention evenly on interlocutors, context and verbal message.<br />It was introduced to our academic community by Svenka Savić, firstly as teaching within undergraduate studies at Department of Serbian language and linguistics, at the Faculty of Philosophy in Novi Sad.&nbsp; She published a course book Discourse Analysis (1993) for this subject at the University of Novi Sad and established, with numerous associates, a project &bdquo;The Corpus of Novi Sad conversational Serbian language&rdquo;. Today, apart from Department of Serbian language and linguistics, discourse analysis as a subject is taught at Department of journalism and partly at Department of English language and literature.<br />At the end of the XX and the beginning of the XXI century, a new approach of analysing spoken and written forms of discourse appeared, under the name critical discourse analysis (CDA). Within CDA, the researchers mainly deal with the representation of demonstration of power, control and social inequalities in various institutions, one of which is the court.<br />Its application in the study of discourse aspects in courtroom, CDA has particularly found in the works from Anglosphere, while other language spheres have not been researched enough. The subject matter of these works are different grammatical and discourse features of talk in the courtroom such as the use of nominalization, passive construction and technical terms during judical proceedings (Gibbons, 1999), dominant position of a judge/jury in the courtroom as well as&nbsp; demonstration of power by priority turn-taking during judical proceedings (Přidalov&aacute;, 1999), analysis of types of questions during judical proceedings and their role in guiding the participants&rsquo; statements (Cotterill, 2003).<br />In the literature in Serbian language, the works dealing with legal and judical matters mainly focus on the text- written form of courtroom discourse, which manifests itself through laws and their various regulations (Janićijević, 2010) or deal with the aspects of the genre of the verdict text (Makević, 2014), and very few works deal with the aspects of talk in the courtroom during judical proceedings (Janković, 2002).<br />The features of courtroom discourse (CD) are the subject of this work. The term courtroom discourse means the type of talk where one spoken event is realized in spatially public sphere (in a courtroom), where several persons with different social and discourse roles participate. Discourse strategies during interaction of a judge with other participants in judical proceeding during hearing are in the spotlight, with particular reference to the interaction between the judge and the defendant/accused.<br />The aim of this research is to analyse, describe and explain the discourse of case-law in the institution of court in Serbia and to show relations of social power of participants involved in judical proceedings.<br />It is supposed that tha analysis of conversation between the judge and the defendant/accused will be an excellent indicator of the manner in which the court implements legislative provisions (оn discrimination, equality and etc.) and how social power is defined.<br />The theoretical and methodological framework in this study is in compliance with analysis of use of language, with linguistic activity, above all with the approach of Dutch linguist Teun van Dijk (2009) on power, and in accordance with the Politeness theory by Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson (1987). Both thories are accompanied by descriptive review of selected examples of empirical material.<br />I have used the method of collecting and analysing material rooted in analysis of discourse (Savić, 1993). The empirical material represents nine courtroom hearings from two periods of time: 4 in 1991 and 5 courtroom hearings recorded 24 years later (2015). There are 180.13 minutes of recorded conversation, that is 140 pages of text transcribed into written form prepared for analysis. The units of analysis are words, exchanges and paragraphs (Savić, 1993: 57&ndash;61).<br />The results of the research show that in a courtroom discourse the role of the judge is undoubtedly dominant, having the institutionally given power to lead the hearing and reaches decisions and verdicts. Her communicative as well as social power arises from the domination which she realizes this applying various conversation strategies such as: strategy of posing questions, directing the talk, adjusting behaviour of other interlocutors, starting and ending the talk, use of professional terminology, addresssing strategy, drawing the conclusions, storytelling, interupting and overlapping the interlocutors.<br />Unlike the judge, the defendant/accused is a law layman with small discoursive contribution. Their subordinated role is reflected in the following strategies: question answering, attempting to direct the talk, attempting to pose a question, principle of cooperation, addressing, repeating and self-repeating, interupting and overlapping, storytelling and hesitating.<br />Based on the results of the analysis of the courtroom hearings, we can draw the conclusion that the courtroom discourse is rather hybrid in its genre. It represents, on grammatic, lexic, semantic and pragmatic level, merging of&nbsp; formal written legal discourse and informal spoken language of everday conversation.<br />Suggestion for direct practice. It is essential to establish more successful model of communication in a courtroom during the interaction among law experts (judges, prosecutors, lawyers) and law laymen: avoiding unfamiliar terms, using simple sentences (avoiding passive and impersonal constructions and nominalizations), using polite and gender-sensitive language, so as to assimilate the use of official institutional language with the speech of interlocutors who are not part of the court hierarchy.</p>