Submitted by Morgana Silva (morgana_linhares@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-06-16T12:20:19Z No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 1919980 bytes, checksum: aa03b296bb2b18e12b45124d49521d30 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-16T12:20:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 1919980 bytes, checksum: aa03b296bb2b18e12b45124d49521d30 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-07-27 / The universalism vs. relativism dichotomy should not be perceived as a mere doctrinal issue. It means major obstacle to the effective protection of the human being in the international and internal orders. On one hand, the universal abstraction of human rights suffers severe critical, on the other hand, culture is dangerously positioned as an immutable element. It important to overcome this scenario and build the perception of common human rights. Even against this environment of disintegration, that rise of culture as an argument cannot put aside the protection of human life. The solution to the criticism of universalism and for strengthening the discourse of human rights relativism is the construction of a common core of human rights based on the prevalence of human rights. This research shows that it is so. Common is the space in which one of us are or wish to be part of. In the space of human rights, the common core was built by the main treaties of international law that form the so-called protection systems of the human being. It is very high level, because it goes beyond state borders. It was seat as essential assumptions the differential nature of the norms of international human rights law to ensure the international legal personality of the human person, beyond that, establishes the supremacy of international law over national law. Also, the foundation of the creation of the common core of human rights is in the primacy of human rights, defended as part of the ius cogens norm. The basis of the concept of common is the concept of policy in Hanna Arendt’s works. Therefore, the analysis of political activity in constructing common human rights toke place in international and domestic spaces. In international jurisdiction, the courts of human rights represent advances in constructing the hard core of human rights, although some structural aspects still deserve strong critics. In the Brazilian internal order, chaos around these matters is the main conclusion. Qualitative and quantitative methodologies were applied and, especially, the inductive, deductive, hypothetical-deductive methods of approach and typological method of procedure. / A dicotomia relativismo x universalismo não deve ser percebida como mera questão doutrinária. Ela significa grande obstáculo à efetiva proteção da pessoa humana na ordem internacional e nas ordens internas. Por um lado, a abstração universalista dos direitos humanos sofre severas críticas, por outro, a cultura se posiciona perigosamente como elemento imutável. É preciso superar esta questão e construir a percepção de direitos humanos comuns. Mesmo diante do ambiente de desintegração não se vislumbra argumento que consiga justificar a não proteção da vida humana. A solução para as críticas ao universalismo e para o fortalecimento do discurso de relativização dos direitos humanos está na construção de um núcleo comum de direitos humanos fundamentada na prevalência dos direitos humanos. É o que demonstra a pesquisa. O comum corresponde ao espaço no qual todos são parte ou desejam ser parte. No espaço dos direitos humanos, o núcleo comum foi construído pelos principais tratados de Direito Internacional que formam os denominados sistemas de proteção internacional da pessoa humana. Trata-se de graduação elevadíssima, porque ultrapassa as fronteiras estatais. Foram assentados como pressupostos essenciais o caráter diferenciado das normas de direito internacional dos direitos humanos que asseguram a personalidade jurídica internacional da pessoa humana, além disso, estabelece-se a primazia do direito internacional sobre os direitos nacionais. Além disso, o fundamento da criação do núcleo comum de direitos humanos está na primazia dos direitos humanos, defendida como norma componente do ius cogens. A base do conceito de comum está no conceito de política de Hanna Arendt. Portanto, a análise da atuação política de construção dos direitos humanos comuns foi feita no plano internacional e no plano interno. Na jurisdição internacional, as cortes de direitos humanos representam os avanços na construção do referido núcleo, embora alguns aspectos estruturais ainda mereçam fortes críticas. Na ordem interna brasileira, o caos em torno da matéria é a principal conclusão. Foram aplicadas as metodologias qualitativas e quantitativas, bem como, com destaque, os métodos de abordagem indutivo, dedutivo, hipotético-dedutivo e método de procedimento tipológico.

O reconhecimento, pelos tribunais, da possibilidade de as partes escolherem livremente o foro que deverá decidir eventual litígio consiste em um tema de estudo do direito internacional privado que gera intensas discussões. Embora seja possível se argumentar que, com base no princípio da autonomia da vontade, seja plenamente aceitável a fixação da competência do tribunal a partir da vontade das partes, a jurisprudência brasileira, de maneira não uniforme, ainda reluta em aceitar esse fato. Entende-se que não seria possível às partes afastar a atuação do judiciário brasileiro em hipótese de competência concorrente. O estudo do direito convencional e regional (União Européia e Mercosul) acerca da matéria evidencia uma tendência em favor do reconhecimento da possibilidade de escolha de foro estrangeiro pelos contratantes. Neste contexto, a presente dissertação pretende demonstrar que as justificativas jurídicas que embasam a denegação à eleição de foro estrangeiro à luz do ordenamento brasileiro não se sustentam, e que se faz necessário o reconhecimento, pelo país, da possibilidade de escolha pelos contratantes do tribunal competente para decidir a causa. / The courts acceptance of the freedom of the parties in choosing the court under which they will seek to resolve any possible litigation is a controversial matter of international private law. Although it is possible to state that the choice of court based on the free will principle is entirely legitimate, the Brazilian case law, even if not unanimously, still resists accepting this fact. It is understood that the contracting parties could not fail to resort to the Brazilian courts in the event of concurring jurisdiction. The study of contractual and regional law (European Union and Mercosur) on this matter shows a tendency towards the acceptance of choice of court by the contracting parties. In this context, the aim of this dissertation is to demonstrate the lack of legal reasons for denying the choice of court in light of the Brazilian legal system, as well as that Brazil should accept the discretion of the contracting parties in choosing the court under which they want to litigate their case.

L'étude des fondements de la compétence internationale des juridictions repose en général sur la recherche de proximité entre le juge et le litige. En effet, dans une conception traditionnelle, la compétence internationale est une question de limitation spatiale de la fonction juridictionnelle de l'Etat, limitation qui doit se faire de manière neutre et en fonction de la localisation territoriale des éléments du litige. Or, ce programme d'organisation de la compétence internationale va au-devant de graves difficultés en raison de la dématérialisation croissante des activités humaines et de la massification des relations privées transfrontières. Plus fondamentalement, la conception proximiste fait peu de cas de l'idée que la compétence internationale constitue avant tout une organisation par l'Etat de sa mission de justice dans les litiges internationaux. Cette organisation devrait refléter les considérations de justice ayant cours dans ledit Etat, considérations qui peuvent être observées à deux niveaux ; celui de la justice procédurale et celui de la justice matérielle. Ces deux niveaux d'analyse constituent les considérations substantielles dont nous nous proposons d'étudier, autour de la matière délictuelle, l'influence sur l'organisation de la compétence internationale. Ainsi, la présente recherche entreprend, d'abord, de souligner les faiblesses de l 'approche proximiste de la compétence internationale, dont ni les justifications, ni les résultats ne résistent à l'examen. Une fois ce travail de déconstruction effectué, elle envisage, ensuite, une reconstruction des fondements de la compétence internationale à partir de considérations substantielles. / It is a common place idea that the rules of international jurisdiction are based on the geographical localization of the dispute, also known as the principle of proximity. If one thinks, as is the case traditionally, of international jurisdiction as being a question of territorial limitation of a State's adjudicatory authority, it makes sense to rely on the localization of the dispute to organize it in a neutral way. Yet, this program is faced with dire difficulties, namely the growing virtualization of entire swathes of human activities and the rise in cross border private relations. More fundamentally, the vision of international jurisdiction as being based on the principle of proximity pays little heed to the notion that international jurisdiction is but an organization by the State of its duty to render justice, be it with regards to cross border private relations. In this perspective, the rules of international jurisdiction should reflect the values and principles of justice that are held by the State, and more generally within the society. These values may be apprehended at two levels: at the level of procedural justice and at the level of substantial justice. These two levels can be merged into a broader category, that of policy considerations and it is the goal of this work to study the influence of these policy considerations on the rules of international jurisdiction with regards to cross border tort cases. This research first underlines the shortcomings of the localizing approach to international jurisdiction. It then moves to envisage an organization of the State's adjudicatory authority in cross border private relations that would be based on policy considerations.

La notion de souveraineté est souvent analysée, interprétée et critiquée sous un angle purement individualiste, comme appartenant à l'État. Toutefois, en raison de la pluralité des États qui caractérise le droit international, la souveraineté est une notion nécessairement pluraliste. L'analyse de la structure normative et institutionnelle de l'ordre juridique international montre effectivement que la souveraineté appartient à l'ensemble des États et signifie et assure leur statut privilégié dans cet ordre juridique. Dès lors, la souveraineté devient une qualité pour justifier les privilèges et les exclusivités des États par rapport aux autres entités de la scène internationale: tout dérive des États et tout doit nécessairement et obligatoirement passer par les États. Cependant, il existe un certain nombre de phénomènes qui affectent cette configuration état-centrique de l'ordre juridique international. Il s'agit notamment des phénomènes dits de la mondialisation qui font fi des divisions spatiales fondées sur l'organisation politique des États. Dans ce processus de mondialisation qui rend floues et in effectives les frontières étatiques, le rôle des États se trouve de plus en plus affaibli et remis en question. L'émergence de nouveaux acteurs représentatifs et des normativités alternatives est la manifestationde cette évolution qui va dans le sens d'un dépassement de la conception état-centrique du droit international et, par conséquent, d'une remise en question de la souveraineté des États. / The notion of sovereignty has often been analyzed, interpreted and criticized in purely individualistic terms and deemed to belong to the State. However, due to the plurality of States characterizing the international law, the sovereignty becomes necessarily a pluralistic notion. The analysis of the normative and institutional structure of the international legal order shows, indeed, that the sovereignty belongs to ail States and also means and ensures their prevailing status in this legal order. As a consequence, sovereignty becomes a quality for justifying the privileges and exc\usivities of State in comparison to other entities on the international scene: everything derives from the State and must also necessarily and absolutely be achieved through the State. However, there are a number of phenomena affecting this State-centric configuration of the international legal order. These are the phenomena of the globalization, which flout spatial divisions based on the politicalorganization of the States. The raIe of State has increasingly become weaker and question able in this process of globalization, which renders State borders blurry and ineffective. The emergence of new representative players and alternative normativity reflects this development which is in line with an overrun of the Statecentric concept of the international law and, consequently, calls into question the State sovereignty.

法院處理涉外標準必要專利之案件時，經常面臨國際管轄以及準據法適用的問題。涉及議題包含授權契約之成立與效力、專利侵權、違反競爭法等。本文先分析我國涉外民事法律適用法在智慧財產案件上之實務適用情形，認為目前涉外民事法律適用法第42條第1項應僅適用與智慧財產權利內容本身相關之爭議，智慧財產契約或侵權行為案件，則應適用契約與一般侵權行為之選法規則。 其次，本文透過研究日本、中國、韓國、美國、英國等國之標準必要專利案件，探討標準必要專利案件中，標準制定組織的智財權政策與F/RAND承諾，經常約定以標準制定組織所在地法為準據法，因此所生之授權契約爭議與競爭法爭議，包括法院是否有權管轄，以及應該如何適用之準據法。在與F/RAND相關之爭議裡，各國法院鮮少有拒絕管轄的情形。準據法方面，實務上基於當事人意思自主原則，適用標準制定組織之智財權政策與F/RAND承諾之準據法，判斷F/RAND承諾之性質，以及當事人間授權契約是否成立以及其效力為何。競爭法方面，實務上各國皆適用內國競爭法，以決定標準必要專利權人之行為是否濫用其市場地位。 經由比較法與實務案件之分析，本文主張標準必要專利之中基於F/RAND所生之契約爭議，仍應適用標準制定組織之智財權政策與F/RAND承諾中所約定之法律。適用涉外民事法律適用法部分，法院實務判決應更清楚明確定性案件以及適用涉外民事法律適用法之依據與理由，俾使涉外民事法律適用法第42條第1項之意義更為明確。競爭法之部分，由於其強行法規之性質，實務皆適用法庭地法，原則上僅就影響國內市場之涉外行為判斷。此外，就我國立法就智慧財產之國際管轄規定付之闕如，應該針對智慧財產之特殊性增加相關規定。 / In cross-border SEP-related cases, courts often face the problems of international jurisdiction and the choice of law. SEP-realted cases often involve issues such as the nature of the F/RAND declarations and the IPR policies of Standard Setting Organizations (SSOs), the formation and the effect of licensing agreements, and violation of competition law, etc. The thesis starts from the examination of Act Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements in Taiwan. Article 42(1) of the Act should be applied only to the issues related to the content of IP right itself. As for IP infringements and IP-related contracts, the choice of law rules on general infringements and contracts should be applied. Secondly, the thesis further looks into the practice of conflict of law in Japan Korea, PRC, the UK and the US on SEP-related cases, which mostly apply the principle of party autonomy to determine the nature of F/RAND declarations and the nature of SSOs’ IPR policies. As for the competition law argument, based on the mandatory nature of competition law, the court often applied lex fori to the issues. Back to the private international law in Taiwan, the thesis suggests that the court should elaborate more specifically on the process of the court determining the characterization of the case and further deciding the choice of law. Besides, Taiwan should also legislate the law on the international jurisdiction on IP cases.

Les répercussions de la crise économique et politique que le Liban connait aujourd’hui ne se sont pas limitées à ses frontières. Un nombre très important d’individus résidants à l’extérieur de ce pays ont été touchés directement depuis le début de la crise. En effet, depuis octobre 2019, toute personne détenant des dépôts auprès des banques commerciales libanaises se voit refuser l’accès à ces fonds, surtout pour les transferts internationaux. Ces mesures mises en place par les banques commerciales représentent, en l'absence de législation appropriée, un contrôle des capitaux de facto dépourvu de toute légalité aux yeux du droit libanais. Compte tenu de la corruption qui ravage les institutions étatiques et des interférences politiques dans l’appareil judiciaire libanais, un recours depuis le Liban s’avère impossible aujourd’hui pour les déposants étrangers. Ces derniers recherchent désespérément un forum compétent afin d’exercer leurs droits dans l’espoir de récupérer un jour leurs économies investies dans les banques libanaises. De ces déposants, un nombre important réside au Québec. Ce groupe de personnes a subi un préjudice commun susceptible d’engendrer des litiges similaires. Ainsi se pose la question traitée par ce mémoire. En ce qui concerne les déposants québécois, et en considérant les objectifs de l’action collective québécoise, cette procédure pourrait-elle satisfaire leurs besoins d’accès à la justice? Afin de répondre à cette question, plusieurs problématiques se posent. Notamment, la compétence des tribunaux québécois de se saisir de ce litige, la satisfaction de ce dernier aux critères d’autorisation de l’action collective et les difficultés inhérentes à cette procédure dans le contexte factuel particulier. Ainsi, le lecteur comprendra, ce mémoire aura l’aspect d’une étude de cas pratique hypothétique. Toutefois, les enjeux juridiques seront traités en détail et de manière exhaustive. L’objectif principal demeure la faisabilité de ce recours selon le droit positif québécois. / The repercussions of the economic and political crisis that Lebanon is experiencing today are not limited to its borders. A very large number of individuals residing outside this country have been directly affected since the beginning of this crisis. Indeed, since October 2019, any person holding deposits in Lebanese commercial banks has been denied access to these funds, especially in the case of international transfers. These measures put in place by the commercial banks represent a de facto capital control that is, absent appropriate legislation, illegal under Lebanese law. Given the corruption that plagues state institutions and the political interference in the Lebanese judiciary, recourse from Lebanon is impossible today for foreign depositors. These account holders are desperately seeking a competent forum to exercise their rights in the hope of one day recovering their savings invested in Lebanese banks. Of these depositors, a large number resides in Quebec. This group of people have suffered a common prejudice that could lead to similar litigation. This raises the question addressed by this thesis. With respect to Quebec plaintiffs and considering the objectives of the Quebec class action, could this procedure satisfy their need for access to justice? In order to answer this question, several elements must be considered. In particular, the jurisdiction of the Quebec courts to hear this case, whether it meets the criteria for certification of a class action and the difficulties inherent to this procedure considering the peculiar factual context. Thus, the reader will understand that this thesis will have the aspect of a hypothetical practical case study. However, the legal issues will be dealt with in detail and in a comprehensive manner. The main objective remains to determine the feasibility of this recourse within the framework of Quebec's positive law.

This diploma thesis focuses on the analysis of the constitution of marriage legal regulation in the new Civil Code and the relating legislation. Primarily, it deals with the concept and the purpose of marriage, along with the moment of its constitution and, it outlines alternative forms of entering into marriage. The thesis further analyses the difference between the civil and religious marriage. The major chapter is devoted to entering into marriage with an international jurisdiction conflict because the number of marriages between Czech citizens with foreigners continues to increase. It becomes more frequent that the Czech citizens enter into marriage abroad. At the end, the causes and consequences of the putative marriage and the invalidity of the entering into marriage are examined.

L’accès à la justice est un droit fondamental et général, conçu comme nécessaire à l’état de droit. Cette dette de justice repose sur l’État qui doit assurer l’accès effectif, et donc matériel, à la justice à tout justiciable. Dans cette perspective, l’arbitrage international, justice privée, fait naître un conflit de juridictions. Si la justice arbitrale doit être préservée, ce n’est qu’à la condition qu’elle soit effective. Or, l’aspect négatif du principe de compétence-compétence crée en droit français une situation de déni de justice économique dans l’hypothèse d’impécuniosité d’un litigant (i.e. partie faible). Cette partie ne peut recourir à l’arbitrage faute de moyens financiers suffisants et les juridictions étatiques refusent leur saisine. Dès lors, cet effet négatif doit être écarté. L’État français sera responsable du déni de justice lorsqu’il est internationalement compétent. En ce cas, le juge étatique est invité à constater l’inapplicabilité de la convention d’arbitrage et sa caducité. Néanmoins, afin de préserver la volonté contractuelle exprimée dans la convention d’arbitrage, il est possible de se fonder sur l’obligation de collaboration qui lie les litigants afin de mettre en oeuvre la responsabilité de la partie forte. Le recours à la responsabilité contractuelle permet ainsi d’assurer tant l’accès à la justice que le respect de la convention d’arbitrage d’une part, et d’autre part, de sanctionner une partie invoquant de manière abusive son impécuniosité. / The access to justice is fundamental and general. It is conceived as necessary for the rule of law. This debt of justice fall on the State that must ensure the effective and material access for all litigants. In this perspective, the international arbitration, a private justice, arise potential conflict of jurisdictions. If the arbitral justice must be preserved, it is only if it is effective. But the negative aspect of the principle of “compétence-compétence” in French law creates a situation of denial of economical justice in the case of an impecunious litigant (i.e. weaker part). The part can neather resorts to arbitration, for lack of sufficient funds, and to state courts, that refuse to jugde the litigation. Therefore, this negative effect must be rejected. The French jurisdiction will be responsible for the denial of justice when it is competent in judging international litigation. In this case, the contract can be void and can not be applied. However, in order to preserve the contractual intent expressed in the arbitration agreement, it is possible to rely on the duty of collaboration between the litigants in order to implement the responsibility of the stronger part. The use of contractual liability thus ensures, at one hand, the access to justice with respect to the arbitration agreement, and on the other hand, that the invoker’s part is sanctioned if it raised improperly the impecuniosity state.

The PhD thesis "Current Issues in International Insolvency Law" aims to describe and draw attention to the moments that, in the opinion of its author, have had the strongest impact on international insolvency law so far. As such it is chiefly devoted to the analysis of existing regulation in the area of European insolvency law (which is principally based on Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings - the "Old Insolvency Regulation" - and Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings - the "New Insolvency Regulation"), and also provides a selection of the relevant case law which has over time significantly changed the way in which specific issues and instruments related to this area are viewed. To do justice to the complexity of the subject matter, the thesis also discusses the determination of jurisdiction in cross-border insolvency proceedings and recognition of the effects of foreign insolvency proceedings in relations between EU and non-EU countries. The main aim of the thesis is to answer the following questions: which legal documents have had the strongest impact on the current form of international insolvency law; whether and how the interpretation of the concept of centre of a debtor's main...

L’influence libérale en droit de la famille et l’essor de l’idéologie individualiste ont provoqué un pluralisme des formes de conjugalité et ont considérablement accru la diversité des règles et des méthodes applicables aux couples en droit international privé contemporain.L’analyse des couples en droit international privé nous a alors conduit à repenser le droit international privé du couple. La déconstruction de la matière met en lumière l’inadaptation actuelle de la méthode conflictuelle classique et l’insuffisance de la méthode de la reconnaissance. En effet, l’actuel droit international privé du couple ne permet pas de garantir la continuité internationale du lien conjugal, pas plus qu’elle ne permet d’assurer un traitement juridique cohérent des problèmes auxquels sont confrontés les couples internationaux. Une réflexion quant à une possible évolution méthodologique de la matière était donc nécessaire. Cette étude vise à démontrer qu’une adaptation de la méthode conflictuelle classique à l’aune des objectifs de la méthode de la reconnaissance et fondée sur un raisonnement en termes de conflit d’autorités est possible. Elle apporterait aux règles de droit international privé du couple une meilleure cohérence tout en assurant aux rapports conjugaux internationaux une réelle stabilité. / The liberal influence in Family Law and the rise of individualist ideology have led to a multiplication of conjugal life forms and considerably increased the diversity of laws and methods applicable to couples in International Private Law. To analyse couples under International Private Law leads us to rethink the International Private Law of the Couple. Deconstructing this subject brings to light the current non-adaptation of the classic conflict of laws method and the insufficiency of the recognition approach. In fact, current International Private Law as it pertains to couples neither guarantees the international recognition of theconjugal bond nor ensures a coherent legal treatment of legal problems faced by international couples. It is therefore necessary to examine a possible methodological evolution of thesubject. This study aims to demonstrate that it is possible to adapt the classic conflict of lawsmethod by taking into account the objectives of the recognition approach whilst founding iton the lex auctoritas rule. This would not only bring better coherence to International Private Law of the Couple but it would also assure a real legal stability for international conjugal relationships.