A teoria nemo potest venire contra factum proprium visa a coibir condutas contraditórias que rompam as legítimas expectativas geradas em terceiros. Não se trata de vedar qualquer contradição, mas apenas aquelas de que decorra ruptura da confiança gerada por comportamento anterior. O instituto é objeto de estudos aprofundados no âmbito do Direito Civil, mas na seara processual poucos trabalhos foram desenvolvidos. Não obstante, a experiência jurisprudencial revela a importância de sua aplicabilidade ao Processo Civil, porque os comportamentos processuais também são capazes de gerar expectativas que merecem ser protegidas quando frustradas pela adoção de condutas processuais contraditórias. Ao Processo Civil se aplicam os princípios da boa-fé objetiva e da cooperação, exigindo de todos os sujeitos processuais condutas pautadas na observância desses dois postulados. Uma vez rompida essa exigência, por meio da adoção de comportamentos processuais contraditórios, surge espaço para a incidência do venire, cuja finalidade reside em obstar os efeitos da contradição, bem como incentivar a reflexão prévia dos sujeitos processuais sobre as possíveis consequências de seus atos. Destaca-se como finalidade do presente trabalho delimitar as bases jurídicas para aplicação do instituto ao processo, definir seus principais requisitos e consequências jurídicas. / The nemo potest venire contra factum proprium theory aims to stop contradictory conducts that break legitimate expectations entrusted by third parties. It is not about avoiding any contradiction, but only those which violate the trust originated by previous behavior. The institute was object of further investigation in the Civil Law field of research, however in the Civil Procedure Law there are only few studies about it. Nevertheless, jurisprudence experience reveals the importance of its applicability in Civil Procedure, once procedural conducts also are able to create expectations that deserve to be preserved when frustrated by contradictory behavior. The good-faith and cooperation principles are applied to Civil Procedure, demanding that all parties involved act in accordance with those principles. Once the parties involved take contradictory conducts ignoring this demand, the nemo potest venire contra factum proprium can be invoked in order to withhold contradictory effects, and also to stimulate previous thoughts, avoiding contradictory conducts. This essay proposes to set legal basis to apply the nemo postet venire contra factum proprium theory in the Civil Procedure disputes, and also to define its main structures and legal consequences.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2018-02-16T19:31:06Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Andrea Cristina Zanetti.pdf: 2439766 bytes, checksum: 481dd19f7c3daf7c408724a6245a0a23 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-02-16T19:31:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Andrea Cristina Zanetti.pdf: 2439766 bytes, checksum: 481dd19f7c3daf7c408724a6245a0a23 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-02-05 / Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico - CNPq / The purposes of this work is understanding the role of termination without cause in long-term contracts and contracts for an indefinite term, as well as their current limits, which are established in particular by the principle of good faith. To such end, in order to direct and deepen the topic, our approach focuses specifically on private healthcare contracts, a contract subject to term that exemplifies the complexity of current contractual relations and demonstrates the process of fragmentation of private law in different microsystems, which also impacts on unilateral notice as a form of termination of the contractual relationship and a kind of unilateral termination for convenience. Generally, in the perspective of unilateral termination without cause, the operability of good faith allows its control to occur in two distinct moments: upon controlling the contractual content (providing guidelines for or restricting unilateral termination) and upon controlling actual exercise of the right (by means of the observance of certain obligations, respect to codes of conduct and repression of the undue, disproportionate and illegitimate use of this form of extinction of the contract). These controls and their consequences are what may result in the invalidity of the contractual provision, the right to indemnification and even in maintaining or extending the effectiveness of the contract. This demonstrates the current dimension attributed to good faith in the control of unilateral termination, which is gradually intensified depending on the contractual microsystem involved and whether it is a business or existential (essential) contract. In view of this new perspective, the issue of unilateral termination in contracts governed by the microlegal framework of Law 9,656/1998 (Health Plans Act) is presented from the perspective of the speciality and essentiality of its contractual object, which influence the operability of good faith and requires acknowledgment of the microsystem in which it is inserted, and which also needs to relate to the other subsystems that form Private Law, in a coherent and systematic interpretation in the search for possible solutions to the issue, mainly due to the fact that the aforementioned law does not clearly deal with this form of termination regarding the different parties involved in private healthcare contracts / Este trabalho tem por finalidade compreender o papel da denúncia desmotivada nos contratos por tempo indeterminado e de longa duração, bem como seus atuais limites, dados especialmente pela boa-fé objetiva. Para tanto, aborda especificamente os contratos privados de assistência à saúde, por se tratar de um contrato de duração que exemplifica a complexidade das relações contratuais atuais e que demonstra o processo de fragmentação do direito privado em diferentes microssistemas, o que também impacta na denúncia como forma de cessação da relação contratual e espécie de resilição unilateral. De maneira geral, a operabilidade da boa-fé, na perspectiva da denúncia desmotivada, permite que seu controle ocorra em dois momentos distintos: controle do conteúdo contratual (com o direcionamento ou restrição da cláusula de denúncia); e controle de exercício (que ocorre mediante a observância de determinadas obrigações, respeito a deveres de conduta e combate ao uso desvirtuado, desproporcional e ilegítimo dessa forma de extinção do contrato). São esses controles e suas consequências que podem resultar na invalidade da disposição contratual, no direito à indenização e até mesmo na manutenção ou extensão da eficácia do contrato, demonstrando as dimensões atuais que a boa-fé alcança no controle da denúncia e que se intensificam gradualmente, conforme o microssistema contratual e segundo se trate de um contrato empresarial ou existencial (essencial). Diante dessa nova perspectiva, a questão da denúncia nos contratos regidos pelo micro-ordenamento da Lei no 9.656/1998 (Lei dos Planos de Saúde) é apresentada por meio da especialidade e essencialidade de seu objeto contratual, o que influencia na operabilidade da boa-fé e demanda o reconhecimento do microssistema em que está inserido, o qual também necessita se relacionar com outros subsistemas que compõem o Direito Privado, em uma interpretação coerente e sistemática na busca de possíveis soluções para a temática, sobretudo pelo fato de a referida lei não tratar com clareza dessa forma extintiva para as diferentes partes que compõem os contratos privados de assistência à saúde

O trabalho tem por objetivo à análise jurídica do plano de recuperação e suas consequências práticas, questionando até que ponto o objetivo de um acordo imposto será alcançado, tendo em vista os diferentes interesses em jogo. A primeira parte é dedicada ao exame das disciplinas da recuperação, traçando um histórico evolutivo deste instrumento a partir da concordata. Neste ponto, são apresentadas as teorias quanto a sua natureza jurídica. A segunda parte, por sua vez, aponta breves considerações de como o direito alienígena disciplina a recuperação. Na terceira parte, o trabalho analisa a recuperação como jogo estratégico, pois existem riscos inerentes a sua execução. Isso porque, do ponto de vista econômico, o plano de recuperação, por ser contrato incompleto, impõe riscos, por portar variáveis não previstas, como por exemplo, a mudança de política econômica ou a crise financeira mundial. Assim sendo, o trabalho analisa as possibilidades de renegociação dos termos do plano, bem como as soluções que podem ser usadas quando da incompletude. Neste sentido, analisa os mecanismos da arbitragem, da governança coorporativa e da cláusula hardship, além dos princípios da boa-fé objetiva, função social do contrato, função social da empresa e teoria da imprevisão. Como a recuperação judicial e extrajudicial representam meios de reestruturação que beneficiam a coletividade de interessados: estando de um lado o devedor que pretende obter prazos para o cumprimento de suas obrigações; de outro lado os credores que visualizam uma forma de obter seus créditos, ainda existem outros (credores) que poderão discordar da proposta. Para sanar esta possibilidade (do credor buscar a solução individual de seus interesses em contraposição àqueles coletivos dos credores) a Lei 11.101/05 criou a modalidade impositiva, na qual se impõe aos dissidentes o acordo dos que aderiram voluntariamente. Por este motivo, há divergências quanto a natureza jurídica do plano de recuperação. Neste sentido, a quarta parte do trabalho traz considerações quanto a natureza jurídica dos planos de recuperação judicial e extrajudicial. / The aim of this work is assess the legal analysis of a judicial recovery plan and its practical consequences, questioning to what extent the objective of an agreement will be reached if come into force, given the different interests at stake. The first part deals with the consideration of the disciplines of recovery, tracing the evolutionary history of this instrument from a point of concordata. At this point, theories as to their legal nature are presented. The second part, in turn, brings brief considerations of how the foreign laws discipline the recovery. In the third part, the paper examines the recovery as a strategic game, since there are risks inherent in its execution. From an economic point of view, these risks arise from an incomplete contract carrying unforeseen variables, for instance, the change in the economic policy as well as the world wide financial crisis. So, the paper analyzes the possibilities of renegotiating the terms of the plan, as well as solutions that can be used when the incompleteness. In this sense, analyzing the mechanisms of arbitration, corporate governance and the hardship clause, in addition to the principles of objective good faith, the contract´s social function, the company\'s social function and theory of unpredictability. As the judicial and extrajudicial´s recovery represents means of restructuring, which benefits the collective of the people involved: on one side the debtor who wishes to obtain deadlines for compliance with its obligations, on the other side creditors who see a way to get their credits back, and also there are others (creditors) who may disagree with the proposal. To address this possibility (the creditor seeking the solution of his individual interests as opposed to those collective interests of creditors) Law 11.101/05 created the imposing form, which is imposed on dissidents, the agreement of those who joined voluntarily. For this reason, there are differences of opinion about the legal nature of the recovery plan. In this sense, the fourth part of the work brings the legal considerations in plans and extra-judicial recovery.

En droit colombien, face à une inexécution contractuelle, règne la règle, issue du droit français, de la résolution judiciaire. Ses conditions d’exercice ont été précisées par la doctrine et la jurisprudence, non sans de nombreuses ambiguïtés qui résultent de la difficulté de comprendre et de mettre en pratique ce procédé. Face à cette vision traditionnelle, l’unilatéralisme a fait irruption dans le monde contractuel contemporain et, plus concrètement, la possibilité de mettre fin à un contrat de manière unilatérale en cas d’inexécution. Cette tendance, qui trouve ses origines dans le droit anglo-saxon avant d’avoir pénétré le droit des pays de tradition romano-germanique, prétend revitaliser cette phase critique du contrat en évitant le recours au juge, au moins dans un premier moment, permettant que le créancier remédie à l’inexécution en mettant rapidement fin au contrat afin de rechercher sur le marché des solutions efficaces. Cette règle pourrait-elle être retenue en droit colombien ? En dépit de l’apparent monopole qu’y détient la résolution judiciaire, tant le Code civil que le Code de commerce colombiens, prévoient des hypothèses qui reconnaissent cette possibilité. Par ailleurs, plus récemment, a été acceptée la possibilité de convenir de clauses résolutoires. Ainsi, nous considérons qu’il est possible d’accepter la généralisation d’une règle de rupture unilatérale pour inexécution. À cet égard, l’étude du droit comparé s’agissant de l’inexécution ouvrant la voie à une rupture du contrat, d’une part, et de la manière dont elle s’exerce une rupture en cas d’inexécution, d’autre part, est d’un grand intérêt. Une telle analyse nourrit une proposition qui non seulement fournit des éléments en vue de l’admission de la rupture unilatérale du contrat pour inexécution en droit colombien, mais aussi cherche à éclairer la lecture qui a, jusqu’à présent, prévalu en matière d’inexécution résolutoire. / Under the Colombian law, the general rule in case of breach of contract is that of termination as a consequence of a court order. Its conditions of exercise have been the object of development by the doctrine and case law, not without several issues that make difficult to understand and put into practice such category. In contrast with this traditional vision, unilateralism breaks in the contemporary contractual world and more specifically, the possibility of termination of contract in such a unilateral way in case of a breach. This trend has its roots in Common law and has been permeating the countries of Roman-Germanic law tradition; and it aims to grant vitality to that critical contractual phase, thus avoiding the intervention of the judge, at least as a first measure, allowing the creditor to remedy the consequences of the breach of contract by an early termination in order to seek effective solutions in the marketplace. Could this rule have a place in Colombian law? Despite the seemingly apparent monopoly of judicial termination of contract, both the civil code and the code of commerce acknowledge this as a possibility. Similarly, more recently the possibility of including termination clauses has been accepted. However, we hold that it is possible to accept a generalization of the rule of unilateral termination of contract in case of breach. A study of comparative law regarding the breach that results in contract termination and the analysis on the way this prerogative should be exercised are of great importance; it does not only enriches a proposal providing the parameters for the unilateral termination of a contract when a breach arises in Colombian Law, but also clarifies the understanding that until now exists in the matter of termination for non-performance.

No description available.

La question à laquelle ce travail tente de répondre est la suivante: l'intérêt d'assurance doit-il être considéré comme un élément constitutif de la déclaration initiale du risque en assurance de dommages? Notre hypothèse de travail dans ce contexte est que l'intérêt doit être déclaré dans la mesure où il constitue un risque moral. Afin de soutenir notre argumentation, nous avons divisé notre étude en deux parties. Premièrement, nous avons examiné toutes les facettes de l'intérêt d'assurance. Tout d'abord son historique, ensuite sa définition et enfin l'interprétation qu'en ont donnée les tribunaux au fil des ans. Puis, nous avons fait de même avec la notion de déclaration initiale de risque. Plus particulièrement, nous avons examiné les conséquences d'une brèche à l'obligation de l'assuré à l'étape de la formation du contrat. Les conclusions que nous avons tirées de cette analyse sont les suivantes: 1. Il existe toujours un questionnement quant au moment précis où l'assuré doit remplir son obligation de détenir un intérêt d'assurance. L'intérêt d'assurance pourrait être examiné uniquement à l'arrivée du sinistre, alors que la déclaration initiale de risque doit être examinée au moment de la souscription de l'assurance; 2. Les différents intérêts qu'une personne peut avoir dans un bien n'influent pas directement sur le risque assurable, contrairement à la déclaration initiale qui sert justement à circonscrire le risque. Cette conclusion est par ailleurs conforme à l'historique de l'exigence de l'intérêt lui-même, quoique certains jugements affirment le contraire; 3. L'intérêt d'assurance peut être modifié en cours de contrat sans entacher la validité du contrat alors que la déclaration initiale de risque ne peut être modifiée sans encourir le risque de voir la prime d'assurance augmentée ou le risque d'assurance refusé: 4. Par contre, l'intérêt particulier qu'une personne détient dans une chose peut constituer un risque subjectif accru pour l'assureur dans certaines circonstances. / This work tries to answer one question: should the insurable interest be an element of the initial declaration of risk? Our main hypothesis is to prove that the interest must be declared when it constitutes a moral risk. To support our opinion, we divided our argument in two parts. The first one is dedicated to the insurable interest : its definition, its history and its interpretation given by the court through the years. ln the second part, we discuss the representation of risk. Particularly, we examine the consequences of a breach in the insured's obligation to divulgate ail the pertinent information to the insurer. Our conclusions are the following : 1. An interrogation still exists concerning the insured's obligation of having an insurable interest at the moment of the loss or also at the signing of the contract. Some authors consider that the insurable interest has to exist only at the loss; 2. The different interest which a person can have should not influence directly the risk, contrarily to the initial declaration which is used to identify and Iimit the risk. This conclusion is conform to the historie background of the insurable interest; 3. The insurable interest can be modify without changing the validity of the contract. On the contrary, the initial declaration of risk can not be modified without a raise in the premium or a refusaI; 4. The particular interest detained by an individual can constitute an increased subjective risk for the insurer in certain circumstances. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)"

Ce mémoire aborde la question de la responsabilité précontractuelle en regardant son incidence en droit québécois ainsi qu'en droit international. Plus précisément, il s'agit de savoir comment est traitée la rupture des négociations lorsqu'aucun avant-contrat n'a été rédigé à cet effet. Afin de pouvoir déterminer ses grands paramètres, le texte aborde dans un premier temps la nature de cette responsabilité. N'étant pas codifiée en droit québécois et ne faisant l'objet d'aucune spécification dans les grands instruments internationaux, cette nature doit être associée à l'un des deux grands régimes de responsabilité soit: contractuel ou extracontractuel. L'importance de cette détermination n'est pas simplement théorique puisqu'elle a une influence directe sur plusieurs éléments comme la prescription ou le droit international privé. Au Québec, la doctrine et la jurisprudence ont choisi d'associer la responsabilité précontractuelle au domaine extracontractuel. Ainsi, elle devra suivre le modèle classique de faute, dommage et lien causal. Cependant, en droit international, la question de la nature reste encore nébuleuse compte tenu de la diversité des membres qui composent les comités d'élaboration des normes. Tous s'entendent pourtant sur un concept fondamental entourant la responsabilité précontractuelle : la bonne foi. Elle est au centre de la faute et dicte une éthique des pourparlers. Ainsi, dans un deuxième temps, la mise en œuvre de la responsabilité est abordée. De cette notion de bonne foi découlent de nombreux devoirs que les parties négociantes se doivent de respecter. Ils sont de création jurisprudentielle et demandent une étude au cas par cas. La liberté contractuelle étant le principe de base dans la formation des contrats, les tribunaux québécois sanctionnent rarement les cas de rupture des négociations. C'est ce principe de liberté qui empêche les pays de common law d'accepter le concept de bonne foi et de responsabilité précontractuelle, même s'ils sanctionnent, par l'intermédiaire de mécanismes, les comportements fautifs dans les pourparlers. Finalement, les dommages et les intérêts pouvant être réclamés varient. Au Québec et en France, autant les pertes subies que les gains manqués sont indemnisés tandis que les instruments internationaux sont plus réticents pour accorder un montant pour le gain manqué. Bref, la responsabilité précontractuelle est en pleine construction et son utilisation devant les tribunaux est encore peu fréquente. / The main focus of this thesis is to investigate pre-contractual liability as it pertains to Quebec and International law. More specifically, it will examine how breaches in negotiations are dealt with when there are no existing pre-contracts. In order to determine the parameters involved, the nature of the liability will be determined. Since it has not been coded within Quebec law and is not specified in any major international documents, liability is considered within the framework of one of two main systems, either contractual or extra-contractua1. This is not simply a theoretical issue since it directly influences prescription and private International law. In Quebec, doctrine and jurisprudence have associated pre-contractual liability with the extra-contractual framework, thus following the c1assic model of fault, injury and causality. The nature of the liability remains unclear under International law due to the diversity among members comprising the committees that elaborate norms. However, all agree that there is a fundamental concept underlying pre-contractual liability: that of good faith. It remains central to the notion of fault and dictates the ethics involved in negotiations. In addition to the nature of the liability, we will also discuss how it is brought into play. The notion of good faith implies that negotiating partners have certain duties with regard to each other that they must respect. These duties have been developed through jurisprudence and each case must be evaluated separately. Quebec courts rarely sanction breaches in negotiations because they relate to the basic concept of freedom of contract. It is this notion of freedom that prevents Common law countries from accepting the concepts of good faith and pre-contractual liability, even though they sanction faulty behaviour during negotiations through various mechanisms. The damages that can be sought vary. In Quebec and France, damages for losses and projected losses are awarded, although damages for projected losses are rarely awarded under International law. In conclusion, pre-contractual liability is emerging and developing as an entity even though court claims to this effect remain infrequent.

No description available.

Magister Legum - LLM

No description available.