[pt] O objetivo do presente trabalho é analisar os critérios e parâmetros utilizados para a aferição do adimplemento substancial no caso concreto e as dificuldades daí decorrentes, evidenciadas pela aplicação assistemática do instituto pelos tribunais brasileiros. Além disso, também se propõe a analisar as repercussões na esfera do credor na hipótese de configuração do adimplemento substancial. / [en] The main propose of this work is to analyze the criteria and parameters used to fulfill and verify the so-called substantial performance institute as evidenced by the unsystematic application of the legal practice by Brazilian courts. In addition, it also assesses the repercussions on the creditor s rights in the event of configuration of substantial performance.

[pt] A presente dissertação tem como objetivo analisar a quantificação do lucro da intervenção, partindo da convicção de que a utilização indevida do direito de um terceiro não pode jamais ser um bom negócio. Inicialmente, será demonstrado que o enriquecimento sem causa é o instituto mais adequado para lidar com situações em que uma pessoa se beneficia injustamente à custa de outra. Serão minuciosamente analisados os critérios que precisam ser atendidos para que se caracterize esse tipo de enriquecimento, como o aumento patrimonial do interveniente, a obtenção da vantagem à custa de outrem, a ausência de justa causa e a subsidiariedade do instituto. Em seguida, serão explorados os métodos objetivos para calcular o valor que deve ser devolvido ao titular do direito violado, apontando a inaplicabilidade da teoria do duplo limite aos casos de lucro da intervenção, bem como as razões pelas quais os valores pagos a título de reparação de danos extrapatrimoniais não devem ser abatidos do montante a ser restituído. Sustenta-se, ainda, a inadequação de compensar o lucro com o dano dentro do contexto de enriquecimento sem causa. Por fim, será discutido o papel da boa-fé e da má-fé na conduta do interventor, onde o trabalho explorará as divergências na doutrina sobre o tema, concluindo que se o interventor age de boa-fé deve restituir o valor de mercado da vantagem obtida e o lucro da intervenção deve ser repartido entre o interventor e o titular de direito, de forma proporcional à contribuição de cada um. Quanto à má-fé, conclui-se que, além do valor devido pelo uso do bem, o interventor deve restituir todo o lucro obtido com a intervenção. Essa abordagem proporcionará uma análise detalhada dos aspectos legais e éticos envolvidos na quantificação do lucro da intervenção, contribuindo para uma compreensão mais profunda do tema no contexto do Direito brasileiro. / [en] This dissertation aims to analyze the quantification of the disgorgement of profits, based on the conviction that the improper use of a third party s right can never be a good deal. Initially, it will be demonstrated that unjust enrichment is the most appropriate institute for dealing with situations in which one person benefits unfairly at the expense of another. The criteria that need to be met in order to characterize this type of enrichment will be thoroughly analyzed, such as the increase in the intervening party s assets, obtaining the advantage at the expense of others, the absence of just cause and the subsidiarity of the institute. Next, objective methods will be explored to calculate the amount that must be returned to the holder of the violated right, pointing out the inapplicability of the double limit theory to cases of profit from intervention, as well as the reasons why the amounts paid as reparation of moral damages must not be deducted from the amount to be refunded. It is also argued that it is inappropriate to compensate profit for damage within the context of unjust enrichment. Finally, the role of good faith and bad faith in the intervenor s conduct will be discussed, where the work will explore the divergences in the doctrine on the subject, concluding that if the intervenor acts in good faith he must restore the market value of the advantage obtained and the profit from the intervention must be shared between the intervener and the right holder, in proportion to the contribution of each one. As for bad faith, it is concluded that, in addition to the amount due for the use of the asset, the intervener must refund all the profit obtained from the intervention. This approach will provide a detailed analysis of the legal and ethical aspects involved in quantifying the profit from the intervention, contributing to a deeper understanding of the topic in the context of Brazilian Law.

Magistro darbe nagrinėjamas dar senovės Romos teisėje suformuotas vienas iš nuosavybės teisės įgijimo pagrindų – įgyjamosios senaties institutas, jo taikymo sąlygos. Darbo tikslas – išnagrinėti įgyjamosios senaties instituto taikymo sąlygų, t.y. sąžiningai atsiradusio bei sąžiningo, teisėto, atviro bei nepertraukiamo valdymo bei daikto valdymo kaip savo, turinį, apibendrinti Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo Teismo praktiką. Darbe analizuojama daikto valdymo kaip faktinės būsenos ir kaip savarankiškos daiktinės teisės samprata, jų atsiradimo ir pasibaigimo momentų ir pagrindų santykis. Didelis dėmesys yra skiriamas teismų praktikoje kilusioms įgyjamosios senaties instituto taikymo problemoms, pateikiami jų pavyzdžiai ir galimi sprendimo būdai. / This study is devoted to the analysis of the acquisitive prescription (its conditions) as the foundation of the acquisition of ownership. Acquisitive prescription derives from Roman law. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the subject-matter of conditions of the acquisitive prescription – the acquisition of the thing in good faith, the possession of it in good faith, legitimately, openly, continuously as its own, to summarize the practice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania. The fact of possession itself, also the possession as an independent right in rem, the relation of the acquisition and the termination moments and grounds are also analyzed. The extensive attention is given to problems araised from the practice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, the examples of such problems and its possible solutions also are given.

Suretyships given in favour of banks are being challenged in the courts on the basis of equitable doctrines of unconscionable conduct, undue influence, or statutory provisions dealing with unfair conduct or unfair contract terms. This thesis is an enquiry into a bank's duties of disclosure or advice to an intending surety. Such an investigation also necessitates a study of the relationship between banker and customer, as the surety is quite often a customer of the bank as well, and, as a surety's obligation to the bank is an accessory obligation, the obligation is dependent on a valid principal obligation between the bank and the principal debtor - the customer. The face of modern banking has, however, changed dramatically and most major banks have become multi-functional. As a result, the banker-customer relationship may often be seen as a fiduciary relationship. A major problem brought about my multi-functioning banks is that of conflicts of interest between the bank and its customer. Furthermore, the banker-customer relationship is providing much more scope for lender liability than in the past. Various factors are currently having an impact on the law of contract, and this is expected to affect the legal policy makers in their assessments of whether a duty of disclosure of material facts exits or not. A surety has long been a favoured debtor in the eyes of the law, and the courts have developed a plethora of technical principles on which a surety can be relieved of his obligation. The escape routes of the surety, especially if he is a consumer as well, on the new grounds of public policy, unconscionability, good faith or unreasonableness, are growing. The results of these trends is the expected demise of suretyship as an acceptable, cheap form of debt security in the banking sector. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

再保險之目的，在於提供保險人保險保障。其方式乃再保險人就原保險人在原保險契約中所負之給付責任，予以部份或全部的補償。再保險契約就再保險人之再保險給付責任所為之約定，最常見者為「同一命運原則」之約定。依「同一命運條款」之字面解釋，此條款係指再保險人須與原保險人「同一命運」，於原保險人對被保險人為保險給付後，補償原保險人因對被保險人為保險給付所生之損害。 依據損害補償原則，須保險人之保險給付在保險契約及再保險契約之承保範圍內，再保險人始負再保險給付之責任。為了避免嚴格依據損害補償原則解釋再保險人之責任，造成保險人無法取得再保險保障之結果，並提高對於保險人之保障，再保險契約雙方乃藉由同一命運條款的相關約定，約定保險人只須證明其已向被保險人為補償給付且其給付係依「誠信」所為，再保險人即須同其命運，向保險人為補償給付。再保險人此一契約義務，乃再保險契約雙方當事人基於契約自由，於再保險契約中特別加入同一命運條款的結果。 保險人之「誠信」乃同一命運原則適用之基石，此為法院所共同肯認。然而，對於同一命運原則於個案中之具體適用，法院之看法似乎並無足夠的一致性。究竟，決定再保險契約雙方當事人權利義務的同一命運原則，法院如何解釋其適用上發生之爭議？又，法院對於抽象的誠信原則如何解釋？在同一命運原則的背景下，再保險人是否可以提出何種抗辯以免除其保險給付責任？最後，是否這些問題的解答可以有某程度的預測可能性，以供日後再保險契約雙方草擬同一命運條款之參考？ 針對保險人對被保險人所應為之補償，再保險人與原保險人可能有不同解釋，前者認為再保險人與保險人同一命運之範圍，應以原保險及再保險約定之範圍為限；後者則認為凡保險人所給付與被保險人者，再保險人皆須與其同一命運，負擔給付責任。縱使再保險契約雙方皆主張其以再保險契約之約定為給付責任範圍之界定基礎，然基於利益彼此對立之立場，雙方對於「契約約定」往往有不同詮釋。再保險契約雙方間之爭議，實務上常見者如，原保險人對被保險人所給付之通融賠款（Ex-gratia payment）、懲罰性賠償（Punitive damages）等，是否屬於再保險人與保險人同一命運之範圍？將此類爭議一般化，須探究者為，同一命運條款何種程度限制了再保險人對原保險人之給付表示異議的權利？ 另外，倘若再保險契約中沒有同一命運條款的約定，是否可認為此條款為再保險契約所「默示」（Implied）？此問題涉及同一命運原則的歷史背景，與再保險市場的運作實務息息相關，對於契約的解釋方法也有重要啟示。 同一命運原則為再保險交易發展史上，最常受到爭議的問題之一。現今之再保險交易環境已然愈趨複雜，不僅是所保危險之價額日趨提高，投入再保險交易之保險人數增加且交易類型複雜化，皆使得再保險交易雙方之風險分配及責任分擔，不再可以全然依賴保險人對於誠信原則之遵守。反之，應同時強調再保險與保險之不同，亦即，前者係由專業之保險人為交易雙方而進行之交易，故再保險人應可依其專業，對所保危險主動向保險人提出詢問，此亦顯示了保險人及再保險人間彼此合作愈趨重要，為再保險人負擔再保險給付責任之正當性基礎。本文嘗試處理以上提出的爭議問題，並對可能之解決提出建議。 / The reinsurance loss settlement clause, which appears in a variety of forms of wordings, historically has been one of the most difficult aspects of reinsurance law and practice. In recent days, more and more litigation has arisen as a result of such clauses. This study centers upon the interesting and oftentimes confusing issue of the scope and effect of such clauses, and how they define both the reinsured’s and the reinsurers’ liability. The purpose of reinsurance is to provide insurance protection by the reinsurer for the reinsured, namely, the insurer. At the beginning of reinsurance history when there were only a small number of insurers operating in the insurance market, insurers were fairly familiar with one another, and that resulted in a minimum of formality in doing business. In terms of reinsurance, reinsurers, when asked to pay by their reinsured, normally did not go out of their way to initiate a de novo review or assessment of the risk insured. The main reasons for such practice were, for one, insurers were so familiar with their business partners that they did not see the need for such re-assessment of the risk, and for another, in the past, the nature of the risks insured was not as complicated as those we are faced with nowadays. With a view to enhancing business efficiency and providing better protection for insurers, the parties that engaged in a reinsurance agreement oftentimes would insert into the agreement a “follow the fortunes” or “follow the settlements” clause. Such clauses bound the reinsurers to follow the fortunes/settlements of their reinsured without the reinsured’s liability having been proved, and restrained the reinsurers from refusing to indemnify the reinsured on the ground that liability did not exist under the original policy, provided that the reinsured had acted in a bona fide and businesslike way. In a word, the existence of the loss settlement clause was a logical consequence of the purpose of reinsurance, and the reinsurers’ obligation under such clauses was conditioned on the reinsured’s good faith. Reinsurance loss settlement clauses have been interpreted by the court rather favorably for the reinsured. Courts would normally find coverage for the reinsured, once they decided that the reinsured had acted in good faith in settling with the insured, even if they held that the reinsured had not been legally liable. This fact highlights the importance of the reinsured’s duty of utmost good faith in reinsurance law and practice. However, what exactly is good faith, and what are the reinsured’s obligations under the good faith requirement? Is there a general rule that the courts have developed to justify their finding of the reinsured’s good faith? If good faith, being abstract in itself and susceptible to courts’ subjective discretion, serves as the “standard” to evaluate or define the liability of the parties to a reinsurance agreement, how does it usually function? Does it at times seem so abstract and variable that the reinsurance agreement parties have a hard time predicting their liability under such a standard? Also, in this study, the questions of the implication of loss settlement clauses and the scope or effect of such clauses are explored. The former question asks, where the reinsurance contracts do not contain any “follow the fortunes or settlements” provisions, does the law, custom or practice read into the contracts any obligation on the reinsurer to follow its reinsured’s fortunes or settlements? This question is important in that it deals with the applicability of loss settlement clauses, and thus has a fundamental impact on how reinsurance contracts are interpreted. The latter question aims at clarifying how loss settlement clauses are applied to pertinent areas such as ex gratia payments, punitive damages, reinsurers’ liability caps, payments related to the Wellington Agreement and claims cooperation clauses. Specific examples are given here in order to better understand how loss settlements clauses are put to practical use. Discussion concerned with this question also demonstrates how a loosely worded loss settlement clause could give rise to disputes between the parties. To better define the parties’ rights and obligations under a reinsurance agreement, a more detailed review of how the reinsurance environment as a whole is functioning and how the courts interpret reinsurance loss settlement clauses is required. This issue will be even more worth pondering now that we are seeing a more complex reinsurance market where the parties’ interests are potentially conflicting, which is per se a challenge to the general view that the reinsurers should follow the fortunes or settlements of the reinsured.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)". Ce mémoire a été accepté à l'unanimité et classé parmi les 15% des mémoires de la discipline. / La franchise: une recette magique que chacun aimerait maîtriser pour s'assurer la réussite dans le monde des affaires. Or, le secret de cette recette revient à appliquer un simple postulat: réitérer, par un franchisé, la réussite du concept d'un franchiseur qui a déjà fait ses preuves. Mais, auparavant, il est essentiel que le franchiseur transmette au franchisé les éléments qui lui ont valu cette même réussite, quitte à ce que ce dernier s'engage à les mettre en oeuvre selon les prescriptions de son initiateur et sous son contrôle. Une telle mise en ouvre appelle, cependant, que les deux protagonistes empruntent une avenue basée sur la coopération, la confiance, la loyauté et la bonne foi. Néanmoins, une telle démarche n'est pas évidente en pratique en ce que les deux partenaires sont animés par des intérêts divergents, conflictuels et antimoniques. Dès lors, le rapport contractuel né du contrat de franchise se verra empreint par un déséquilibre manifeste entre les prestations réciproques des parties issu de la position économiquement dominante du franchiseur. Ce dernier, sera à même de fixer unilatéralement le contenu contractuel, de sorte à diminuer ses obligations tout en élargissant le champ de ses droits. Surgit alors tout un pan de comportements opportunistes du franchiseur se traduisant, notamment, par des abus au détriment du franchisé qui ne peut qu'acquiescer à la volonté de son partenaire. En effet, l'étude du droit civil révèle que les systèmes civilistes reposent sur une conception libérale du contrat permettant de présumer que les parties sont capables de défendre leurs intérêts. En vertu de la théorie de l'autonomie de la volonté, le contrat est présumé être conforme aux intérêts respectifs des parties. À défaut de tout vice de consentement, le contrat ne peut qu'être équilibré. Cependant, s'il se trouve que le contrat est malgré tout déséquilibré, le droit civil, à moins de circonstances exceptionnelles, n y pourra rien en pareil cas. La lésion ne vicie pas les conventions conclues entre majeurs non protégés, et la théorie de l'imprévision est rejetée par la plupart des systèmes civilistes. L'indifférence du droit civil face à ce déséquilibre se justifie essentiellement par deux impératifs: la liberté contractuelle et la sécurité juridique. Le principe de la force obligatoire du contrat s'impose aux parties autant qu'au juge et, partant, exclut toute tentative du juge de réviser un contrat déséquilibré. Toutefois, devant cette indifférence et cet immobilisme de la loi, le droit a, depuis, énormément évolué dans le sens d'apporter une protection plus accrue à la partie la plus faible au contrat. À ce titre, nous assistons aujourd'hui à une double intervention plus réaliste: l'intervention du juge et celle du législateur (particulièrement dans les contrats d'adhésion). D'abord, le juge manifeste une volonté accrue de corriger des déséquilibres contractuels choquants, notamment en présence de clauses contractuelles manifestement abusives, et ce au regard des exigences d'une justice contractuelle basée sur la bonne foi des parties et l'exigence d'agir raisonnablement. Ensuite, le législateur à travers l'élaboration de droits spéciaux ayant pour finalité la protection de la partie la plus faible, instaure des règles impératives destinées à condamner les éventuels déséquilibres contractuels. Ce souci de protection justifie l'atteinte ainsi portée au principe de la force obligatoire du contrat. Aussi, le postulat de Fouillée se voit inversé par Lacordaire qui souligne pertinemment que « entre le fort et le faible, c'est la liberté qui asservit et la loi qui libère ». En somme, la protection du franchisé appelle au glissement du rapport contractuel d'un rapport conflictuel vers un rapport de coopération et notamment par la reconnaissance du concept de solidarisme contractuel. Néanmoins, une telle démarche n'est pas sans troubler l'ordre normal de l'idée classique du contrat. D'une part, l'introduction d'obligations implicites au contrat renie en quelque sorte l'idée traditionnelle qu'on a des obligations contractuelles basée sur la commune intention des parties, et d'autre part, elle appelle à la reconsidération, par les systèmes civilistes, de la théorie de l'imprévision comme le suggère le droit uniforme et notamment le Guide d'UNIDROIT sur les accords internationaux de franchise principale, mais aussi les Principes relatifS aux contrats du commerce international. / The Franchise: a magic formula that each individual would like to possess to be able to ensure success in the business world. The secret of this formula exists in the shape of a simple postulate: for the franchisee to reiterate success of the franchised concept, which has already proven itself successful. But first, it is essential that the franchisor transmit the essential elements ofthat success to the franchisee, so that the latter may put into practice those prescribed elements as per the created by the initiators concept and control. This kind of transaction requires that both protagonists enter into their dealing in a manner that is based on cooperation, trust, loyalty and goodfaith. Nevertheless, this process is not easy to establish. In deed, both parties may have divergent interests, causing conflicts and antipathies. Thus, the contractual relationship born ofthe franchise concept, will have at its core a manifest imbalance created by the dominant financial status ofthe franchisor. The latter, is in a position to unilaterally stipulate the contractual contents, in such a manner as to diminish his own obligations while enlarging the scope of his rights. From this, a plethora of opportunistic behaviours from the franchisor translating into varied kinds of abuse to the detriment of the franchisee whom has not choice but to acquiesce to the franchisors wishes. In truth, the study of civil law reveals that the civil systems are founded on a liberal conception of the contract, presuming that both parties are capable of defending their interests. By virtue of the theory of autonomy of the will, the contract is presumed to respect each partie 's interests. Without any vice of consent, the contract can only be balanced. However, if the contract proves to be imbalanced, civil law, unless there are no exceptional circumstances, will have no effect, in such a case. Lesion don't vice conventions concluded between unprotected parties, and the imprevision theory is rejected by most civil systems. The indifference of civil law to the contractual imbalance is justified by two imperatives: contractual liberty and judicial security. The principal of the obligatory force of a contract imposes on both parties, as well as to the judge, and, in that way, excludes all attempts by judge to revise the imbalanced contract. Nonetheless, in spite of the laws indifference and opposition to change, the law has since evolved enormously in supplying more protection to the weakest party of a contract. Thus, we are now witness to a double, more realistic intervention: the intervention of the judge and the legislator (particularly in contracts of adhesions). First, the judge manifests a will to correct the more obviously imbalanced aspects of the contract, most notably with regards to the presence of abusive contractual clauses, taking into account the requirements of a contractual justice based on the goodfaith of both parties and the obligation to act in a reasonable manner. Furthermore, the legislator through the use of special rights for the purpose of protecting the weakest party within the contract, implements imperative rules to restore the balance and fairness of the contract. This worry of protection is justified by the undermine as so imposed to the obligatory force of the contract. Also, the postulate of Fouillée is here revoked by Lacordaire which underlines that between the strong and the weak, it is freedom that enslaves and the law that liberates. To summarize, the protection of the franchisee calls for the modification of the contractual obligation from one of conflict to one of cooperation and notably by the recognition of the contractual solidarity concept. Nevertheless, such a measure does not take place without disturbing the classic concept of the contract. On the one hand, the introduction of the implied terms into the contract denies the traditional idea of the contractual obligations based on the common intention of both parties, and also, it calls for the reconsideration, by the civil systems, of the theory of imprevision as is suggested by the uniform law and especially the Guide to international master franchise arrangements, but also the Unidroit Principles of international commercial contracts.

The thesis deals with questions of pre-contractual liability which is seen as a very specific institute whose conception is diverse in different EU countries and also outside. The main research question is a difference between pre-contractual liability perception in the different countries and its full description in relation to the negotiations of business contracts with an emphasis on Czech law. In the first part, the author analyses historical background of pre-contractual liability in relation to Roman law and German-Austrian legal systems in which the professor Jhering developed that construction of culpa in contrahendo. In the following chapters, the author deals with the description and nature of pre-contractual liability, particularly in questions of whether they are contractual or delictual liability and enter into details the basic facts, example and extent of damages with respect to the European concept of pre-contractual liability. He concludes that the pre-contractual liability is in the European concept as delictual liability, with regard to the decision of European Court of Justice. The author simultaneously mentions that although similar facts in the legal systems, the extent of damages is very different when there is a clear dichotomy between positive and negative interesse. The...

L’essor théorique de l’arbitrage international observé dans les dernières décennies n’a pas toujours été accompagné par le développement d’instruments d’application de ses représentations conceptuelles. L’idée d’un ordre juridique arbitral détaché des ordres étatiques est défendue dans un souci de systématisation théorique du problème plutôt que de résolution pratique du litige entre les parties. En même temps, la justice choisit de s’intéresser plutôt à la solution de l’ordre qu’à celle de l’équité. Nous proposons alors d’examiner les principales distorsions résultant de l’intervention étatique dans l’arbitrage international à partir de cette perspective, soit-elles relatives à la convention (comme les mesures provisoires et référés étatiques ou les contestations de la clause compromissoire), soit-elles relatives à la sentence, spécialement autour de l’exequatur des sentences annulées. Nous présentons la litispendance, les anti-suit injunctions, la res judicata et les tentatives de dialogue entre les différents fors comme des instruments aptes au contrôle de ses déviances, lesquels sont encore trop limités par un raisonnement d’application généralisant, déductif et amoral, fondé sur la méthode du droit international privé, qui n’a plus sa place dans l’arbitrage international. Face à ces distorsions, nous proposons alors la doctrine de l’abus de droit pour permettre un retour vers l’intérêt des parties dans l’arbitrage international. Sans négliger l’importance du « droit », correspondant aux représentations théoriques de l’arbitrage international, cette notion peut néanmoins en saisir les « abus ». La doctrine de l’abus apporte alors une conception matérielle, flexible et finaliste aux mécanismes de contrôle de l’arbitrage international. On ne parlera alors plus de distorsions de l’ordre juridique arbitral, mais d’abus de l’ordre juridique arbitral. / The academic success of international arbitration in the last decades has not always been followed by the consequent development of concrete instrument for its practical applications. The concept of an arbitral legal order detached from national legal systems is defended by doctrine not so much as an useful instrument for practical case resolution, but firstly as a problem of raising a logic and coherent legal scheme. We propose to analyze the main distortions caused by the conflict between this theoretical perspective of an autonomous legal order and the practical matters involved in the pragmatic courts intervention in international arbitration, either relating to the arbitral convention (provisional measures, violation of the arbitration clause) or to the arbitral award, specifically regarding the problem of recognizing annulled awards. We present lis pendens, anti-suit injunctions, res judicata and the efforts of dialogue between jurisdictions judging the sentence regularity as the main instruments contributing to a dialogue, and thus, as instruments to control its possible distortions. However, those mechanisms are deployed through a reasoning that is still too generic, amoral and based in principles of private international law, in a state-centered perspective that cannot serve the international arbitration scheme today. From this finding, we suggest the abuse of rights doctrine as a group of different objectives and subjective standards allowing implementing those mechanisms to control international arbitration in a much more appropriate way, considering its autonomous and material characteristics, embodied in the doctrinal pursuit of an arbitral legal order. This doctrine brings a more flexible, material and finalistic perspective to the international arbitration instruments, approaching the parties interests and leaving a purely conflictual method which is not anymore appropriate in this field. There will be not anymore only distortions of an arbitral legal order, but abuses of that same arbitral legal order.

L'intérêt de l’entreprise est une notion incontournable suscitant de vifs débats doctrinaux. Qu’est-ce que l’intérêt de l’entreprise ? Comment est-il appréhendé par les acteurs du droit ? Quel est son périmètre d’application ? Telles sont les questions auxquelles tente de répondre l’étude. Riche d’enseignements, l’approche doctrinale ne permet pas d’aboutir à un consensus. Pure création de la jurisprudence, la notion est employée afin de contrôler les décisions et les comportements des parties à la relation de travail. Bien que la référence à l’intérêt de l’entreprise soit explicite en ce qui concerne le fondement ou les conditions d’exercice du pouvoir patronal, elle permet aussi d’encadrer le comportement et les décisions prises par le salarié. L’ensemble des acteurs concourant au fonctionnement de l’entreprise doit ainsi agir dans le sens de cet intérêt. À cet égard, l’appréhension de la notion se veut plurielle et fonctionnelle. L’adhésion des salariés, ainsi que des représentants du personnel au projet entrepreneurial suppose leur participation à la prise de décision. Malgré les réformes successives, il faut reconnaître que la participation des salariés à la gestion de l’entreprise demeure très limitée. Cela devrait sans doute évoluer avec l’émergence du concept RSE qui, au-delà d’apparaître comme un nouveau mode de régulation des rapports de travail, tend à promouvoir une responsabilisation des acteurs. L’évolution des rapports sociaux, induit par l’internationalisation des échanges, nécessite des réajustements. L'objectif est alors de parvenir à maintenir un équilibre entre la protection des salariés et de leur emploi et la pérennisation des entreprises. / The company’s interest is an important concept sparking lively doctrinal debate. What is the company’s interest ? Plenty of lessons, doctrinal approach do not lead to a consensus of un unified definition. Pure creation from the case law, the concept is used to control the decisions and behavior of the parties concerning to the employment relationship. Though the reference to the interest of the company is explicit regarding to the foundation or the conditions of exercise of the employer’s power, it helps neverthelessly to regulate behavior and decisions made by the employee. All actors contributing to the operation of the company must act in consistency with the "company’s interest". In this regard, the apprehension of this concept goes to be plural and functional. Membership of employees, as well as staff representatives entrepreneurial project implemented in the interest of the business require their participation in decision making. Despite of the successive reforms in this direction, we must recognize that the participation of employees in the management of the company remains very limited. This should probably change with the emergence of the concept of social corporate responsibility which is a new way of regulating of labor relations, tending to promote stakeholder accountability through enhanced participation. The evolution of social relations, induced by the world trade globalization having an impact on the structure of the company, requires necessary adjustments in the labor law. The aim is to achieve a balance between the protection of employees and their jobs and the sustainability of the company’s development.

O trabalho trata da despedida coletiva e de seu dever de motivação. Embora não haja tratamento legal no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro, a conjugação de normas principiológicas constitucionais e infraconstitucionais permite afirmar que a despedida coletiva é instituto jurídico distinto da despedida individual e, como tal, requer consequências jurídicas também diversas. A fim de compreender os limites dessa figura jurídica e buscar solução genuína e adequada ao quadro nacional, realizou-se pesquisa bibliográfica em autores nacionais e estrangeiros e estudo de casos jurisprudenciais. No primeiro capítulo, buscou-se conceituar o instituto, distinguindo-se entre as despedidas individuais plúrimas e a despedida coletiva. No segundo capítulo, recorreu-se ao estudo do Direito Comparado e das normas de organismos internacionais que tratam do tema. No terceiro capítulo, destacam-se princípios constitucionais, como a dignidade da pessoa humana e a função social da propriedade, e princípios infraconstitucionais, como a boa-fé objetiva e a vedação do abuso de direito. No quarto capítulo, analisam-se as decisões judiciais paradigmáticas envolvendo as empresas Embraer e Usiminas destacando-se, de forma breve, o papel do Poder Judiciário. Ao final, pudemos concluir que a despedida coletiva tem importância crescente na realidade social e, como tal, requer que se tome posse de sua complexidade para seu desvendamento. / The paper deals with collective dismissal and its duty of motivation. Although there is no legal treatment in the Brazilian legal system, the combination of infra-constitutional and constitutional norms related to principles allows us to state that collective dismissal is a legal institution different from individual dismissal and, as such, it also requires different legal consequences. In order to understand the limits of this legal concept and seek a genuine and appropriate solution to the national framework, a bibliographical research was conducted using national and foreign authors as well as jurisprudential study cases. In the first chapter, the aim was to conceptualize the institute, distinguishing between multiple individual dismissals and collective dismissals. In the second chapter, we resorted to the study of comparative law and norms from international bodies dealing with the theme. In the third chapter, constitutional principles such as human dignity and the social function of property and infra-constitutional principles such as objective good faith and the prohibition of abuse of rights are highlighted. In the fourth chapter, the paradigmatic judicial decisions involving the companies Embraer and Usiminas are analyzed briefly stressing the role of the Judiciary Power. At the end, we could conclude that the collective dismissal has increasing importance in social reality and, as such, it requires that possession of its complexity is taken so that it is unveiled.