A l’heure du développement des nouvelles technologies et de la multiplication deshypothèses de représentation, la présence physique et personnelle des différentsprotagonistes du procès dans les lieux de justice interroge. Mode traditionnel d’organisationdes rapports processuels, la présence paraît aujourd’hui remise en cause, notamment enraison des lourdeurs de la procédure qu’elle entraînerait. Pourtant, dans le même temps, desvoix s’élèvent pour reconnaître l’existence d’un principe de présence.La présence des acteurs du procès doit en effet conserver sa place au sein du droitprocessuel, en raison de sa légitimité tant juridique qu’économique dans l’organisation duprocès. Elle apparaît alors comme le substrat d’un principe directeur du procès selon lequelles opérations procédurales déterminantes sur l’issue du litige se déroulent en présence desparties, duquel découleraient de nombreuses situations juridiques présentielles. Ce nouveauprincipe de présence, encore à l’état latent à l’heure actuelle, gagnerait à être renforcé afinde préserver une justice à visage humain. / At the time of the development of new technologies and the increase of legalrepresentation cases, physical and personal presence of trial actors in the justice‘s premisesquestions. The presence, which is considered as the traditional method of organizingprocedural relationships, seems to raise some doubts today, especially because of thecumbersomeness of the procedure involved. Nevertheless, at the same time, voices makethem heard to recognize the existence of a principle of presence.Indeed, the presence of the trial actors should hold its place in the procedural law, becauseof its legal as well as economic legitimacy in the organization of the trial. It appears as thebasis of a guiding principle of the trial according to which the determining proceduraloperations on the outcome of the trial occur in the presence of the parties. From this basis, itfollows many legal situations of presence. This new principle of presence, still at a latentstate for the moment, would benefit from being strengthened in order to preserve the humanface of justice.

Submitted by Pedro Mizukami (pedro.mizukami@fgv.br) on 2011-08-17T20:57:51Z No. of bitstreams: 1 DMPPJ - AGOSTINHO TEIXEIRA DE ALMEIDA FILHO.pdf: 589195 bytes, checksum: 1790025fb2fdaf4044dbb92314c6c229 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Pedro Mizukami (pedro.mizukami@fgv.br) on 2011-08-19T17:44:43Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 DMPPJ - AGOSTINHO TEIXEIRA DE ALMEIDA FILHO.pdf: 589195 bytes, checksum: 1790025fb2fdaf4044dbb92314c6c229 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2011-09-02T18:44:10Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 DMPPJ - AGOSTINHO TEIXEIRA DE ALMEIDA FILHO.pdf: 589195 bytes, checksum: 1790025fb2fdaf4044dbb92314c6c229 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 / Esta dissertação tem por objetivo analisar os institutos da decisão monocrática e do agravo interno, sob o prisma de metodologia empírica que busca priorizar a realidade pragmática da aplicação do artigo 557 do Código de Processo Civil. Enfocou-se o instituto da decisão monocrática no contexto das minirreformas processuais brasileiras, que tiveram como alicerce o princípio da efetividade processual. Esse princípio pressupõe a duração razoável do processo, garantida na Constituição Federal Brasileira. A partir da constitucionalidade desse princípio, defendeu-se a constitucionalidade do artigo 557 do Código de Processo Civil, que não pode ser considerado abstratamente inconstitucional. Demonstrou-se que a aplicabilidade do artigo 557 pode ser inconstitucional se não atender à técnica da ponderação de valores, que garante a interpretação conforme a Constituição. Analisou-se o agravo interno, sob a premissa do valor da celeridade em cotejo com o devido processo legal, que permeou a subsequente análise do procedimento desta espécie de agravo. Após uma reflexão sobre os institutos da decisão monocrática e do agravo interno, aliada ao exame dos princípios do devido processo legal, ampla defesa, contraditório e motivação das decisões judiciais, passou-se ao exame empírico desses institutos jurídicos. Nessa análise, foram coletados e examinados dados estatísticos, que confirmaram – e, assim, possibilitaram a conclusão da dissertação – a constitucionalidade do artigo 557 e a importância de sua interpretação conforme os referidos princípios constitucionais. / This dissertation has the purpose to analise the institutes of the single verdict and the internal appeal, according to empirical methodology that focus the pragmatic reality of the 557 th. dispositive of Code of Civil Procedure`s enforcement. This dissertation focused the institute of the single verdict in the context of the reformation of the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure, which had as foundation the principle of procedure efectiveness. This principle presupposes a reasonable duration of the suit, secured by the Brazilian Federal Constitution. From the constitutionality of this principal, this dissertation defended the constitutionality of the 557 th. dispositive of Code of Civil Procedure, which can`t be considered abstractedly unconstitutional. This dissertation proved that the enforcement of the 557 th. dispositive could be unconstitutional if doesn`t suit the technique of the weighing of values, which secures the interpretation according to the Brazilian Federal Constitution. This dissertation analised the internal appeal, under the presupposition of the value of the reasonable duration of the suit in comparison with the due process of law, which motivate the following analysis of the internal appeal proceeding. After a reflection of single verdict and the internal appeal institutes, also with the analysis of due process of law, legal defense, adversary system and the motivation of the judgement, this dissertation analised the empirical enforcement of these institutes. In this analysis, estatistic data have been collected, which corroborate – and, therefore, enabled the conclusion of the dissertation – the constitutionality of the 557 th. dispositive of Code of Civil Procedure and the consideration of its interpretation according to the mentioned constitucional principles.

Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde 'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:25:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Sergio Silveira Banhos.pdf: 574605 bytes, checksum: c823ec8263dc0871b145aab9b6306412 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007-06-05 / This thesis addresses the recent doctrinal and jurisprudential tendency observed in the law in the context of hypermodernity, which indicates an effective reduction in the use of discretionality in administrative acts as a result of the integrated ap-plication of principles and rules. The traditional legalistic approach is currently giv-ing way to a more wide-ranging view, exemplified in Ronald Dworkin s theory of law as integrity through which not only rules, but also principles themselves, should be subjected to a systemic, integrated analysis. Given this, Dworkin s work forms the theoretical platform for the questions raised by this entire study, since the integrated application of principles and rules has become fundamental in the pursuit of the ideal of justice, bringing a new focus on the role of administrative law in an environment of deep and rapid change that typifies hypermodernity. Consid-ering the new concept of the separation of powers, the notion of strict legality, by presupposing a means of controlling the exercise of State power, must be set against other constitutional principles of equal importance, taking into account the particularities of each case in question. In this context, the traditional concept of discretionality is outmoded. Jurisdictive control of these acts is not only possible, but also absolutely essential in a democratic state of law. The synthesis of this new paradigm for administrative law is clear and should be an indissoluble part of administators agenda in contemporary society: citizens are the effective benefici-aries of constitutional rights and guarantees. The technique of balancing principles by assessing their values in the particular case is already part of the jurisprudence of hypermodernity, which is in synchrony with neopositivism and the theory of law as integrity / Esta dissertação demonstra a recente tendência doutrinária e jurisprudencial ob-servada no Direito da hipermodernidade, que indica efetiva diminuição da parcela de discricionariedade nos atos da Administração Pública, a partir da aplicação in-tegrada de princípios e regras. Da tradicional abordagem puramente legalista passa-se atualmente para uma visão mais abrangente na teoria do Direito como Integridade, de RONALD DWORKIN, mediante a qual não só normas, mas também princípios, devem ser analisados de maneira sistêmica, integrada. Dado isso, a obra de DWORKIN é a base teórica de apoio às questões instigadas por todo este estudo, porque a aplicação integrada de princípios e regras se tornou essencial à busca do ideal de justiça, trazendo novo enfoque quanto ao papel do Direito Ad-ministrativo nesta ambiência de profundas e rápidas transformações típicas da hi-permodernidade. Considerada a nova concepção da separação dos poderes, o princípio da legalidade estrita, por encerrar uma fórmula de contenção do exercí-cio do poder estatal, deve ser contraposto a outros princípios constitucionais de igual relevo, observado o caso concreto. A acepção clássica da discricionarieda-de, assim, encontra-se de vez superada. O controle jurisdicional desses atos não é só possível, mas imprescindível num Estado Democrático de Direito. A síntese desse novo paradigma para o Direito Administrativo é clara e deve pautar a agen-da dos administradores na contemporaneidade: os administrados são os efetivos destinatários dos direitos e das garantias constitucionais. A técnica de pondera-ção dos princípios contrapondo valores nos casos considerados já faz parte da realidade da jurisprudência da hipermodernidade, que se encontra sintonizada com o neopositivismo e com a teoria do Direito como Integridade

司法院釋字第520號解釋於理由書指出：「基於法治國原則，縱令實質正當亦不可取代程序合法」，即一語道出程序正義之重要性。 民間參與公共建設具專業性、複雜性及高風險性、隔代性、利益衝突等特性，在政府與民間合作理念的推動下，法律規定模式已呈現由「條件式」的模式轉向「目的式」模式，致使政府合作對象的甄審（選）成為一種高度專業趨向之判斷，並且可能陷於「決策於未知之中」的困境。民間參與公共建設的推動上，除技術層面之實體審查標準外，實應認真思考面對決策的程序問題，藉由程序之提升，用以補足實體規範的不足。據此，有關引進民間參與公共建設之法規，甄審程序選出的最佳締約對象、最優申請案件或最優申請人「是否即屬適當」，應思考甄審（或評選）程序與組織設計，是否妥適。 本文擬由正當法律程序於美國及日本之發展出發，藉以了解其規範基礎與發展情形，並分析我國司法實務有關正當法律程序原則之解釋，理解我國對於正當法律程序之內涵與要求。其後聚焦行政實務上經常引用作為民間參與公共建設案件辦理依據之獎參條例、採購法及促參法，就其甄審、評選或評審程序與爭議處理程序檢視正當法律程序實踐情形。 本於基本權保障意旨及法律承認權利之保障，基本上本文認同至少應有一最低限度之保障（即聽證權）。至於其他要求為何？本於民間參與公共建設之興建或營運，涉及政府有限資源之分配及申請人(營業自由、契約自由)與使用者（生命、身體、財產）之基本權保障相關，應可由司法院釋字第384號解釋及釋字第709號解釋推導出「組織」要求，而其他如公正作為(迴避、禁止程序外接觸)、受告知權、說明理由及資訊公開，亦正是落實組織適法與聽證權，所不可或缺之要素。

摘 要 資訊時代下，要求國家對於人民提供資訊，係為行政程序要求公開透明化之國家重要任務。近年來，我國法制發展，主要著重在要求政府對不特定多數人公開資訊之相關法制建構。相較於此，課予行政機關於行政程序對特定人民提供資訊，無論是行政機關為單方面的資訊提供，或進一步以對話的方式提供意見的諮詢，為我國法制規範上未予關注之處。現代社會變遷下，行政任務內容朝向複雜及專業化發展，國家扮演的角色亦隨之重新定位，除了在消極方面，要求國家不得過度干預人民權利的行使外；在積極的面向上，國家負有提供人民生存照顧服務的義務。具體落實在一般行政程序當中，由於行政任務的變遷以及法規的繁雜，常使人民難於釐清之間的權益關係，除此之外，在社會行政程序中，程序相對人大多具有在資訊取得較為弱勢之特徵，為了有效落實並達成個別社會給付之目的，需透過行政機關在社會給付行政程序中，提供人民相關協助。 要求國家於行政程序中提供人民相關資訊，涉及正當行政程序在憲法上的定位。釋憲實務對於正當法律程序之發展，及對該概念所為的闡釋，說明程序在憲法上亦受到檢視。除了透過憲法明文規定之權利推導出程序的要求外，特別是在行政領域中，行政程序基本權的肯認，所能發揮人民權利保障的功能，係為近年來實務及學理上，就該權利主張之具體依據及內涵，於法制發展上關注的重心。而要求國家對個別人民提供資訊，足以作為行政程序基本權的具體內涵之一。 在法律的層次方面，基於公益的考量，課予行政機關於行政程序中踐履相關的義務，必須進一步探求系爭法規之規範意旨，透過保護規範理論的操作，探究人民是否具備主觀公權利。我國行政程序法中，並未就行政機關對人民之諮詢及提供資訊義務作一般性規定，然而，在個別社會相關專業法規當中，則存在許多課予行政機關負有諮詢及提供資訊之具體規範。對此，德國法上考量在一般行政程序中，相較於在社會行政程序中的不同需求，將行政機關之諮詢及提供資訊的內容作不同規範，甚至及於行政程序尚未開啟前之程序階段作討論。在我國未就社會給付行政程序另行規範一部專業法規的前提下，在社會給付行政程序中，說明行政機關對個別人民負擔諮詢及提供資訊義務之正當性，分別從行政程序法之一般性規定，及個別社會專業法規之規範作探討。 行政機關違反行政程序行為的法律效果，除了影響系爭行政決定作成的效力外，在國家責任制度方面，透過地位回復請求權之制度建構，俾使人民得請求回復到，如同行政機關已為正確資訊提供之程序地位，進而得為權利之行使及選擇。地位回復請求權對於人民權利保障所能發揮的功能，殊值作為未來我國相關法制度發展的思考面向。 關鍵詞：正當法律程序、正當行政程序、程序基本權、協助義務、良好行政、 諮詢、提供資訊、社會法地位回復請求權、社會行政程序、信賴保護。 / Abstract Under the information age, requiring the State to provide information to the people, is the important tasks for the procedural requirements of transparency. In recent years, the development of Taiwan’s legal system, mainly focused on asking the Government for disclosure of information to public. Compared to this, whether to ask administrative agency to provide information, further to provide advice on ways of dialogue to the specific people were not of the legal norms of the attention. Changes in modern society, the administration task definition faces complex and the specialized development. The role of the State is to reposition, except the negative side, requires that the State shall not interfere unduly with the exercise of the right of the people, on the positive side, the State have obligations to provide the life of care. Realization in general administrative procedure, due to the changes of the administrative tasks, as well as the complexity of regulations, often makes people difficult to clarify the relationship between rights and obligations. In the social administrative procedure, most people are more disadvantaged on the information obtained. In order to effectively implement and achieve social benefits purposes, asked the administrative agency to provide people to assist in the social welfare procedure. Require the State in administrative procedures to provide relevant information to the people, is related to administrative procedures in the positioning of the Constitution. Due process of law in the interpretation of the Judicial Yuan, to illustrate the procedure has also been reviewed in the Constitution. Except through the right of the Constitution provides to derive the requirements specification process, there is necessary to develop the procedural constitutional rights. Especially in administrative area, administrative practice and doctrinal in recent years, are committed to advocating the basis and content of the rights. Require the State to provide information to specific people, enough to serve as one of the content of the procedural constitutional rights. At the level of the legal aspects, based on public interest considerations, obligations of administrative agency in administrative procedures, must further explore whether people have the right of the legal norm. The Administrative Procedure Act of Taiwan, does not provide for the obligation of the administrative agency to consult and provide information to specific people. However, among the social regulations, provides that the administrative agency must provide consultation and information. In this regard, Germany considered the law of general administrative procedure, compared to the different needs in the field of social administrative procedure, provides consulting and providing information in different content, even before the stage has not yet been opened. In the case of social welfare are not standardized administrative procedures and regulations. The legitimacy of the administrative agency in social welfare procedures to provide advice and information to the people of the obligations, can be discussed separately from the general provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, and the requirements of social administrative regulations. If the administrative agency violated administrative procedures, in addition to affecting the validity of administrative decisions made. In the regime of State responsibility, through on the right to recover the procedure status, so that people will ask to return to, as administrative agency to provide correct information, for the exercise of the rights and choices, as the future development of Taiwan's legal system. Key Words：due process of law, due process of administration, the procedural constitutional rights, obligation to assist, Good Administration, consultation, information, the right to recover the procedure status, social administrative procedure, bona fide.

Submitted by RAFAEL VÉRAS DE FREITAS (rafael.veras@lllaw.com.br) on 2016-02-19T17:44:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Versão Final Aprovada da dissertação .pdf: 3707426 bytes, checksum: 60a6a4a1af0efffadf1ad9c675f09201 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by BRUNA BARROS (bruna.barros@fgv.br) on 2016-03-01T18:01:23Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Versão Final Aprovada da dissertação .pdf: 3707426 bytes, checksum: 60a6a4a1af0efffadf1ad9c675f09201 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Marcia Bacha (marcia.bacha@fgv.br) on 2016-03-07T14:17:48Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Versão Final Aprovada da dissertação .pdf: 3707426 bytes, checksum: 60a6a4a1af0efffadf1ad9c675f09201 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-07T14:18:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Versão Final Aprovada da dissertação .pdf: 3707426 bytes, checksum: 60a6a4a1af0efffadf1ad9c675f09201 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-01-28 / This dissertation aims to present a proposal on the legal regime of regulatory expropriation in the light of national law. It is a regulation which subtracts or minimizes the right to property, which does not follow the formal transfer of the domain to the State, without the establishment of the regulatory due process of law referred in the Article 5, item XXXIV of the Constitution of the Republic – CRFB, which requires the payment of a prior and fair compensation to expropriated. To this end, it will be investigated if the institutions through which the state intervenes in private property realize this phenomenon, or is it a failure of regulation. Finally, will be presented a proposal, de lege ferenda, of the compatibility of this phenomenon with the Brazilian Legal System. / Esta dissertação busca investigar as consequências jurídicas das expropriações normativas. Trata-se de um ato regulatório, genérico e abstrato, que subtrai ou minimiza o direito de propriedade, do qual não decorre a transferência formal do domínio para Poder Público. A problemática tem lugar na medida em que essa ablação normativa é levada a efeito, sem o estabelecimento do devido processo legal expropriatório (previsto no art. 5º, inciso XXXIV, da Constituição da República – CRFB), o qual impõe o pagamento de uma prévia e justa indenização ao expropriado. Para este fim, será investigado se os institutos por meio dos quais o Estado intervém na propriedade privada (desapropriação, limitação administrativa, ocupação temporária, requisição administrativa, tombamento) dão conta desse fenômeno, ou se se trata de uma falha da regulação, que produz consequências jurídicas. Ao final, será apresentada uma proposta, de lege ferenda, de disciplina desse fenômeno

A tese busca identificar os elementos jurídicos e extrajurídicos que interferem sobre o comportamento judicial do Supremo Tribunal Federal. A análise é desenvolvida com base nos seguintes modelos decisórios: o modelo legalista, o modelo ideológico, o modelo institucional e o modelo estratégico de comportamento judicial. Ao longo do trabalho, examina-se a influência do direito, da ideologia, das normas que regem o Judiciário, das regras que regem as decisões colegiadas, do Poder Executivo, do Poder Legislativo, da opinião pública e da imprensa no processo decisório do Supremo Tribunal Federal. / This work aims at identifying legal and non-legal factors that interfere with Brazilian Supreme Court decisions. The analysis is developed with basis on the legal model, on the attitudinal model, on the institutional model and on the strategic model of judicial decision-making. It examines the influence of constitutional law, ideology, collegial process, Executive Power, Legislative Power, public opinion and of the media on Brazilian Supreme Court attitudes.

Submitted by Daniel Schmitt (daniel@schmitt.adv.br) on 2017-03-08T14:29:56Z No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV - Trabalho de Qualificação da Dissertação (DS) (28-02-17).pdf: 1238374 bytes, checksum: 77427104099be295ae4735e8aae098ed (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Publicação Direito Rio (publicacao.direitorio@fgv.br) on 2017-03-15T18:39:05Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV - Trabalho de Qualificação da Dissertação (DS) (28-02-17).pdf: 1238374 bytes, checksum: 77427104099be295ae4735e8aae098ed (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-23T13:10:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV - Trabalho de Qualificação da Dissertação (DS) (28-02-17).pdf: 1238374 bytes, checksum: 77427104099be295ae4735e8aae098ed (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017 / This paper deals with the repressive regime in the private insurance market ('MSP'), supervised by SUSEP – Superintendência de Seguros Privados. The research focus is to investigate the structure and the application of the norms that govern SUSEP's regulatory activity, regarding the application of the administrative sanction of fine on the individual offender. The administrative accountability in these cases is analyzed. For that, the theory of sanctioning is dealt with, dealing with the violation and the administrative sanction, especially the administrative penalty of fine. Some of the main principles of administrative sanctioning law are also highlighted, such as due process, lawfulness, characteristics and culpability. It also addresses the issue of relativisation of legality in special compliance regimes. These issues are displayed in an environment of sectoral regulation, therefore, contextualizing the sanctioning power of regulatory agencies. The repressive regime of the MSP is systematized. It identifies the National Council of Private Insurance (CNSP), the Resource Council of the National Private Insurance System (CRSNSP) and SUSEP. The normative archetype of the repressive regime of the MSP is presented, especially CNSP Resolution 243/11. A confrontation between SUSEP's guidelines and decisions of the CRSNSP in the opposite direction is made, regarding the imposition of the administrative penalty of fine on the individual offender, due to its administrative responsibility. At the end, as an outcome of the research, a set of constraints that ensure a more consistent application of the administrative penalty of fines on individuals - when considered as offenders in the MSP – is proposed. / O presente trabalho aborda o regime repressivo no mercado de seguros privados ('MSP'), fiscalizado pela Superintendência de Seguros Privados (SUSEP). O problema de pesquisa é investigar a estrutura e a aplicação das normas que regem a atividade regulatória da SUSEP, no que toca a aplicação da sanção administrativa de multa sobre o infrator pessoa física. Analisa-se a responsabilização administrativa realizada nestes casos. Para tanto, aborda-se a teoria da sanção, tratando do ilícito e da sanção administrativa, em especial da penalidade administrativa de multa. Alguns princípios informadores do direito administrativo sancionador também são destacados, tais como o devido processo legal, a legalidade, a tipicidade e a culpabilidade. Aborda-se, também, a questão da relativização da legalidade nos regimes de sujeição especial. Estas questões são expostas em um ambiente de regulação setorial, portanto, contextualizando-se o poder sancionador dos órgãos reguladores. É realizada a sistematização do regime repressivo do MSP. Identifica-se o Conselho Nacional de Seguros Privados (CNSP), o Conselho de Recursos do Sistema Nacional de Seguros Privados (CRSNSP) e a SUSEP. O arquétipo normativo do regime repressivo do MSP é descrito, destacando-se a Resolução CNSP no 243/11. Realiza-se um confronto entre orientações da SUSEP e decisões do CRSNSP em sentido contrário, a respeito da imposição da sanção administrativa de multa sobre o infrator pessoa física, em razão da sua responsabilização administrativa. Ao final, como resultado de pesquisa, propõe-se um conjunto de condicionantes que asseguram uma aplicação juridicamente mais consistente da penalidade administrativa de multa sobre as pessoas físicas, quando consideradas como infratores no MSP.

A tese busca identificar os elementos jurídicos e extrajurídicos que interferem sobre o comportamento judicial do Supremo Tribunal Federal. A análise é desenvolvida com base nos seguintes modelos decisórios: o modelo legalista, o modelo ideológico, o modelo institucional e o modelo estratégico de comportamento judicial. Ao longo do trabalho, examina-se a influência do direito, da ideologia, das normas que regem o Judiciário, das regras que regem as decisões colegiadas, do Poder Executivo, do Poder Legislativo, da opinião pública e da imprensa no processo decisório do Supremo Tribunal Federal. / This work aims at identifying legal and non-legal factors that interfere with Brazilian Supreme Court decisions. The analysis is developed with basis on the legal model, on the attitudinal model, on the institutional model and on the strategic model of judicial decision-making. It examines the influence of constitutional law, ideology, collegial process, Executive Power, Legislative Power, public opinion and of the media on Brazilian Supreme Court attitudes.