L'arbitre représente le juge dans la procédure d’arbitrage: il tranche, juge et détient la balance de la justice dans cette procédure. Bien que ses décisions soient des sentences arbitrales, elles n’ont pas la force exécutoire d’un jugement judiciaire qui impliquerait une sanction en cas de non-exécution de celle-ci par la partie contre laquelle elle a été rendue. Ainsi, les thèses selon lesquelles les rapports du juge et de l’arbitre sont conflictuels, selon lesquelles les pouvoirs attribués à l’arbitre pour mener sa mission à terme et le principe d’incompétence du juge étatique dans le déroulement d’un arbitrage interne ou international, deviennent réfutables. Soumises pour contrôle et à l’appui du juge étatique, l’instance arbitrale et la sentence arbitrale s'intègrent dans l'ordre juridictionnel. Elles doivent cohabiter ensemble dans une même atmosphère juridique. Le juge dans cette optique a l’obligation de protéger et de respecter la volonté des parties, tout en veillant au bon déroulement de la procédure arbitrale. Ainsi, au regard, des nouvelles réformes en arbitrage en vigueur au Québec, en France et dans plusieurs autres États, les rapports entre les tribunaux judiciaires et l’arbitrage ont évolué vers l’entente, la collaboration et la complémentarité. De plus, les textes légaux et les règles qui gouvernent la procédure arbitrale sont d’une grande importance dans notre exposé, car elles contribuent à la démonstration de ces nouveaux rapports. Ce sont, en effet le respect des règles et la possibilité pour les parties de les manipuler qui rendent l’arbitrage attrayant. Le présent mémoire vise à démontrer l’évolution des rapports entre le juge et l’arbitre au regard de récentes réformes dans le droit de l’arbitrage québécois parallèlement au droit de l’arbitrage français. Notre stratégie consistera à identifier les pouvoirs attribués au juge étatique et à analyser la place de choix réservée au juge étatique dans cette procédure. Puisqu’il s’avère être un appui précieux à l'arbitrage, il conviendrait de redéfinir sa place dans cette procédure, afin de dissiper toutes les incompréhensions qui ont pu exister. / The arbitrator represents the judge in the arbitration proceedings: he decides, judges and holds the balance of justice in the arbitration proceedings. Although its decisions are arbitral awards, they do not have the enforceable force of a judicial judgment that would involve a penalty in the event of non-performance by the party against whom it was issued. Thus, the arguments according to which the reports of the judge and the arbitrator are conflicting, according to which the powers assigned to the arbitrator to complete his mission and the principle of incompetence of the state judge in the conduct of an internal or international arbitration, become refutable. Submitted for review and in support of the State judge, the arbitral body and the arbitral award shall be incorporated into the judicial order. They must live together in the same legal atmosphere. The judge in this regard has the obligation to protect and respect the will of the parties, while ensuring the smooth conduct of the arbitral proceedings. In light of the new arbitration reforms in force in Quebec, France and several other states, the relationship between the courts and arbitration has evolved towards understanding, collaboration and complementarity. In addition, the legal texts and rules governing arbitral proceedings are of great importance in our presentation, as they contribute to the demonstration of these new reports. It is, in fact, the respect of the rules and the possibility for the parties to manipulate them that make the arbitration attractive. The purpose of this brief is to demonstrate the evolution of the relationship between the judge and the arbitrator in light of recent reforms in the law of Quebec arbitration in parallel with the law of French arbitration. Our strategy will be to identify the powers assigned to the state judge and to analyse the place reserved for the state judge in this procedure. Since it proves to be a valuable support for arbitration, it would be appropriate to redefine its place in this procedure, in order to dispel any misunderstandings that may have existed.

European Patents are granted through the European Patent Office. Although such right is unitary, the European patents will break down into a bundle of national patents; each governed by the domestic law of the States which the holder of the right has designated. Since infringement stands in the crossroads between patent enforcement and patent validity, infringement litigation generally touches on the issue of validity as it is impossible to infringe a right that does not exist or no longer exists. The nullity component in infringement litigation gives rise to additional difficulties with respect to the selection of the forum and the applicable law. As a result, the validity challenge is discussed in detail with respect to the application of the relevant rules on international jurisdiction and with respect to the identification of the relevant applicable laws. Cross border litigation in relation to registered intellectual property rights in Europe has been extremely controversial over the years. The jurisdiction of the courts to deal with foreign intellectual property rights is after all not entirely obvious or straightforward in the light of the exclusive jurisdiction provision in the Brussels system. The judgment which the Court of Justice delivered on 13th July 2006 in case Roche and GAT result substantial conflicts. Divergent views had been expressed concerning cross border jurisdiction over intellectual property cases on Article 6(1) of the Brussels I Regulation; and Article 16(4) of the Brussels Convention 1968, what is now Article 22(4) of the Brussels I Regulation. This thesis focuses on the jurisdiction and applicable law on European patent disputes.

An increase in international trade has resulted in an increase in the carriage of goods by sea, which has also promoted the business of marine insurance on a very huge scale. Marine insurance contracts fall within both the admiralty jurisdiction where admiralty laws apply and special contract law where the rules and principles of contract law apply. In certain circumstance this has left the courts with a dilemma in deciding in particular cases which law should apply; whether maritime law, contract law or marine insurance law. There are certain principles under the law of contract that are said to be profound and cannot be ousted easily by substantive law. The principle of party autonomy is one of these principles and it has gained international recognition through a number of cases. However, to date, courts are faced with difficulties in deciding whether to uphold the choice of law on jurisdiction and governing law exercised by parties or resort to substantive law, either by virtue of admiralty law or any other statutes in a country, which provisions may be contrary to the clause on choice of law under the contract. In South Africa practice has shown that courts are always reluctant to apply the clause on choice of law if they believe such application is against the public policy and interest in South Africa. This begs the question as to the precise meaning and effect of “public policy and interest” and how this principle influences the long-standing and well-established principle of party autonomy in admiralty jurisdiction. This dissertation is aimed at providing a legal response to this problem by analysing case law and the different viewpoints of various writers. It is imperative to investigate if their decisions and views answer all the uncertainties with regard to the meaning and the effect of the concept of “public policy and interest” on the principle of party autonomy. / LLM (Import and Export Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

An increase in international trade has resulted in an increase in the carriage of goods by sea, which has also promoted the business of marine insurance on a very huge scale. Marine insurance contracts fall within both the admiralty jurisdiction where admiralty laws apply and special contract law where the rules and principles of contract law apply. In certain circumstance this has left the courts with a dilemma in deciding in particular cases which law should apply; whether maritime law, contract law or marine insurance law. There are certain principles under the law of contract that are said to be profound and cannot be ousted easily by substantive law. The principle of party autonomy is one of these principles and it has gained international recognition through a number of cases. However, to date, courts are faced with difficulties in deciding whether to uphold the choice of law on jurisdiction and governing law exercised by parties or resort to substantive law, either by virtue of admiralty law or any other statutes in a country, which provisions may be contrary to the clause on choice of law under the contract. In South Africa practice has shown that courts are always reluctant to apply the clause on choice of law if they believe such application is against the public policy and interest in South Africa. This begs the question as to the precise meaning and effect of “public policy and interest” and how this principle influences the long-standing and well-established principle of party autonomy in admiralty jurisdiction. This dissertation is aimed at providing a legal response to this problem by analysing case law and the different viewpoints of various writers. It is imperative to investigate if their decisions and views answer all the uncertainties with regard to the meaning and the effect of the concept of “public policy and interest” on the principle of party autonomy. / LLM (Import and Export Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

Text in English / The study aims to investigate criminal jurisdiction of the visiting SADC armed forces during peace time focusing only on the Republic of Botswana and the Republic of South Africa. Since the adoption of the Declaration and Treaty of SADC, the armed forces of both Botswana and South Africa at times find themselves on each other’s territory. Once in each other’s territory the question of criminal jurisdiction becomes imperative. The two countries seem not to agree on the content of status of force agreements while cooperating in terms of the SADC Treaty. The contentious point is that the death sentence is still a competent sentence for certain offences under certain circumstances in terms of Botswana laws, whereas in South Africa the death sentence was declared unconstitutional. In the absence of any agreement, South African armed forces may face a death sentence while in Botswana and Botswana authorities might not be able to carry out a death sentence over their members for offences committed while in South Africa. In trying to answer the question of criminal jurisdiction while on each other’s territory during peace time, a study of the evolution of jurisdiction is undertaken. The laws of both countries are considered, especially the application and protection afforded by their respective constitutions. The approach followed by the UN in sending a peace-keeping force to conflict areas is analysed. A micro-comparison of agreements concluded by selected countries, more especially the NATO agreement, is undertaken. Treaties as a source of international law are analysed to show that rights can be extended and be limited by agreement. The study concludes by recommending that concurrent criminal jurisdiction with certain qualification seems to be the accepted norm and compromise amongst the international community, and that the two countries may consider this approach as the basis for such agreement. / Public, Constitutional, & International Law / LL.M

The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 provides an elaborate dispute resolution system which seeks to resolve disputes in a speedy and cost-effective manner. However, this system is faced with a number of challenges. The application of common law and administrative law causes tension between the Labour Court and civil courts. It creates uncertainty in the development of our labour law jurisprudence and also leads to the problem of forum shopping. These problems in effect undermine the objectives of the Act. This dissertation analyzes problems in the LRA and other legislations leading to forum shopping. It also analyses the view of the courts on this problem and further expounds a number of possible solutions. The analysis revolves mainly around an observation of South African literature and case law. / Mercantile Law / LL.M.

Text in English / The study aims to investigate criminal jurisdiction of the visiting SADC armed forces during peace time focusing only on the Republic of Botswana and the Republic of South Africa. Since the adoption of the Declaration and Treaty of SADC, the armed forces of both Botswana and South Africa at times find themselves on each other’s territory. Once in each other’s territory the question of criminal jurisdiction becomes imperative. The two countries seem not to agree on the content of status of force agreements while cooperating in terms of the SADC Treaty. The contentious point is that the death sentence is still a competent sentence for certain offences under certain circumstances in terms of Botswana laws, whereas in South Africa the death sentence was declared unconstitutional. In the absence of any agreement, South African armed forces may face a death sentence while in Botswana and Botswana authorities might not be able to carry out a death sentence over their members for offences committed while in South Africa. In trying to answer the question of criminal jurisdiction while on each other’s territory during peace time, a study of the evolution of jurisdiction is undertaken. The laws of both countries are considered, especially the application and protection afforded by their respective constitutions. The approach followed by the UN in sending a peace-keeping force to conflict areas is analysed. A micro-comparison of agreements concluded by selected countries, more especially the NATO agreement, is undertaken. Treaties as a source of international law are analysed to show that rights can be extended and be limited by agreement. The study concludes by recommending that concurrent criminal jurisdiction with certain qualification seems to be the accepted norm and compromise amongst the international community, and that the two countries may consider this approach as the basis for such agreement. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LL.M

The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 provides an elaborate dispute resolution system which seeks to resolve disputes in a speedy and cost-effective manner. However, this system is faced with a number of challenges. The application of common law and administrative law causes tension between the Labour Court and civil courts. It creates uncertainty in the development of our labour law jurisprudence and also leads to the problem of forum shopping. These problems in effect undermine the objectives of the Act. This dissertation analyzes problems in the LRA and other legislations leading to forum shopping. It also analyses the view of the courts on this problem and further expounds a number of possible solutions. The analysis revolves mainly around an observation of South African literature and case law. / Mercantile Law / LL.M.

本論文旨在提供台灣廠商在統合專利制度下之歐洲專利策略建議。本論文首先介紹以歐洲專利公約為主之現行歐洲專利制度，其次再介紹統合專利制度與統一專利法院制度。接著再以現階段我國廠商於歐洲專利申請狀況切入，分析現階段我國廠商於歐洲專利之布局狀況，再針對未來即將施行之統合專利制度，對台灣廠商之申請人及專利權人提出策略建議。 歐洲專利公約自1977年生效後，申請人向歐洲專利局遞交歐洲專利申請後，經過指定國程序，即可在歐洲專利公約之會員國間取得專利保護。某些會員國亦會要求遞交翻譯文件及繳納相關規費。然而，相比於美國、日本及中國，現行的歐洲專利制度是分離破碎的，進而導致申請人須負擔高額的申請費用與訴訟成本，同時亦有許多法律不確定性。在2013年2月，歐盟終於完成協商，正式簽訂確立歐洲統合專利與統一專利法院之條約。統一專利法院將在所有參與之會員國間擁有專屬管轄權。統合專利制度之下，申請人獲得歐洲專利之費用下降、申請程序更為簡化，且提供更有利於申請人之申請方式。如此，統合專利制度預期將提升申請專利之效益與吸引更多的申請者。統一專利法院制度之專屬管轄權，將提升專利有效性與訴訟之法律安定性，且訴訟相關費用之減免，亦有利於專利權人。 統合專利制度的所有準備工作雖已於2015年陸續完成，但仍需要德國、英國及另外任一個歐盟成員國批准歐洲統一專利條約方可生效，預計最快可在2017年達成。統一專利法院亦於2016年3月完成裁判費用之規定，並陸續完成各級法院之選址與訴訟案件性質之分類。專利權人與專利申請人應要謹慎思考在新制度下可能帶來之各種挑戰，特別是台灣廠商需要評估在新制度下之專利策略。因此，本文將針對新制度介紹，希冀能提供欲前往申請的台灣廠商專利佈局之策略建議。 / First of all, this Article overviews current European patent system in particular with the system under European Patent Convention. This Article also summarizes the features of new system and considers the practical steps which should be taking now in preparation for the start of new regime. European Patent Convention has entered into force since 1977. Under European Patent Convention, applicant can deliver their application to EPO and once the mention of the grant is published, the patent has to be validated in each of the designated states to keep its protective effect. In a number of member states, the patent proprietors may have to file a translation of the specification and pay fees. However, the current European patent system has been the fragmentation compared to the United States, Japan and China. This has caused to a high cost of application and lawsuit and also a high level of uncertainty. In February 2013, the European Union formally signed an agreement established a single European patent and the Unified Patent Court. The court will have exclusive jurisdiction for all participating Member States. Through European unitary patent system and Unified Patent Court, this new system reduces the costs of obtaining a patent, simplifies procedures, and regulates the language issue in a user-friendlier manner than before. Therefore, unitary patent system are expected to enhance the efficiency and attractiveness. All preparation of unitary patent system is accomplished before 2015, but still need the Germany, the Untied Kingdom and two other European member states to ratify the agreement. The beginning of 2017 is now said to be the earliest that can be achieved. Owing to the new patent system, patent proprietors and applicants, especially Taiwanese enterprises should be contemplating their patent strategy for meeting the challenge created by this new patent right. Thus, the Article presents patent strategy for Taiwanese enterprises under new patent system in Europe.