Det kan idag vid förvärv av aktiebolag uppkomma situationer där rekvisiten för både ogiltighet, enligt avtalslagen, och hävning, enligt köplagen, är uppfyllda. Frågan blir då huruvida part har en möjlighet att välja vilket institut denne vill använda sig av för att försöka få rättelse för det fel denne anser är begånget. I stort handlar frågan om kampen mellan generell avtalsrätt och speciell avtalsrätt. Kan en sökande part välja mellan två olika ersättningsanspråk eller är ett val redan förutbestämt? Frågan kan tyckas vara av marginell vikt då de till synes kan ses som två väldigt lika institut. Valet kan dock resultera i enorma skillnader när det kommer till det potentiella ersättningsanspråket. Hävningsinstitutet ersätter vanligtvis det positiva kontraktsintresset medan ogiltighetsinstitutet, via utomobligatoriska ersättningsregler, endast ämnar att ersätta det negativa intresset. Beroende på hur förhandlingarna och det aktuella förvärvet har gått till kan de olika ersättningsanspråken erbjuda fundamentalt olika ersättningar. Det har historiskt sett hävdats att part inte skall få välja mellan anspråken bland annat enbart på grunden att det ena är mer lönsamt än det andra. Författaren kommer dock till slutsatsen att det, i de fall det uppstår en valmöjlighet mellan instituten, alltid föreligger ett så klandervärt beteende från den svarande parten att det inte finns någon anledning för rättsordningen att skydda denne genom att begränsa den sökandes, och förfördelade partens, ersättningsanspråk. / When acquiring a limited company, situations can arise where the prerequisites of both invalidity, under the Swedish Contracts Act, and cancellation, under the Swedish Sale of Goods Act, are met. The question then arises whether the party has an option which regulation they wish to use in order to seek damages for the wrong he believes has been committed. Can an applicant party choose between the two different claims or is it pre-determined? The question may seem to be of marginal importance as they can be seen as two very similar regulations. However, the choice could result in substantial differences in damages. The cancellation regulation generally reward positive contractual liability, while the invalidity regulation, through law of tort, only intends to replace the negative interest. Depending on how the negotiations and the acquisition has proceeded, the different principals of liability can offer fundamentally different compensation. It has historically been argued that parties should not be allowed to choose between claims based solely on the basis that one is more profitable than the other. The author, however, concludes that, in cases where there is a choice between the regulations, it always exists such a fraudulent behavior by the defendant that there is no reason for the legal system to protect them by restricting the aggrieved party’s compensation claim.

Sandorio, prieštaraujančio imperatyvioms įstatymo normoms, negaliojimas įtvirtinamas tiek Lietuvos, tiek užsienio valstybių nacionalinėje teisėje. Šis negaliojimo pagrindas valstybių nacionaliniuose teisės aktuose, o taip pat ir Europos sutarčių teisėje siejamas su itin svarbių teisės normų pažeidimu, kurių tikslas apsaugoti visos visuomenės mastu reikšmingas vertybes. Sandorio, prieštaraujančio imperatyvioms įstatymo normoms, negaliojimo pagrindas Lietuvos nacionalinėje teisėje įtvirtinamas CK 1.80 straipsnio 1 dalyje. Tai viena iš sutarties laisvės išimčių, nustatytų, siekiant užtikrinti teisėtumą civiliniuose santykiuose, apginti asmens teises ir teisėtus interesus. Sandorio negaliojimas minėtu pagrindu dažniausiai konstatuojamas, esant suinteresuoto asmens prašymui. Be teisės, suteikiamos suinteresuotiems asmenims, teisė ex officio konstatuoti sandorio negaliojimą įtvirtinama teismui, tačiau svarbu, tačiau turi būti nustatyta šio pagrindo taikymui būtina aplinkybių visuma: aplinkybė, kad teisės norma yra imperatyvi, kad ši teisės norma yra pažeista ir, kad pažeidimas lemia sandorio negaliojimą. Europos sutarčių teisėje taip pat atsižvelgiama į pažeidimo pasekmes, sandorio šalių tyčią, pažeidimo rimtumą ir kitas reikšmingas aplinkybes. Teismas, nustatęs šią aplinkybių visumą, t.y., kad sandoris prieštarauja imperatyvioms įstatymo normoms, gali ji pripažinti negaliojančiu ab initio, arba ex nunc, jeigu pagal bylos aplinkybes ab initio sandorio pripažinti negalima. Teismo... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Invalidity of transactions contrary to mandatory rules is recognized in European Contract Law, also in national legal systems. Ground of invalidity of the contract contrary to the imperative rules is introduced at Civil code of the Republic of Lithuania paragraph 1.80. This is one of exceptions of contracts freedom set out in order to ensure the legitimacy of civil relations, to protect individual rights and legitimate interests. The mostly transactions contrary mandatory rules are invalidated as a consequence of being concerned person request. In addition despite of the rights granted to persons, the right to invalidate transaction ex officio is provided to court at paragraph 1.78. The using of the right ex-officio invalidate the transaction is based on the obvious invalidity of the transaction. Therefore, the court decision by its own initiative to invalidated contact contrary to the imperative norms can be made only when all the circumstances by which is based the invalidity of the transaction are investigated and determined. When the court finds existing all the circumstances that the transaction infringes the mandatory rules of the law, it may be declared that transaction is void ab initio or ex nunc. Application of court right ex officio invalidate transaction is especially needed when the transaction violated mandatory rules ensuring the needs of society and protecting the public interest. A lot of such rules regulate state-owned land purchase agreements. Infringement... [to full text]

Invalidity, nullity and ineffectiveness of a resolution of general meeting and other bodies of a limited company Abstract This Master's thesis deals with the issue of invalidity of the resolutions of the general meeting of capital companies in the applicable private law of the Czech Republic. The introduction of this Master's thesis covers the historical development of legislation concerning the general regulation of the limited liability company and the joint stock company with a certain focus on good morals and the invalidity of the resolutions of the general meeting of the capital companies in the territory of the Czechoslovak Republic and its successor state departments. Chapter on the legal nature of the resolutions of the general meeting follows on from this historical definition. Similarly as in the case of historical development, legal nature of the resolutions of general meeting is first addressed in historical context, more specifically before the year 2014. The purpose of this analysis is to define the basic theoretical assumptions, which are also applicable to the legal nature of the resolutions of the general meeting at the time of applicability of the Civil Code and the Business Corporations Act. The chapter is concluded with a finding that the change in the legal nature of the resolutions of...

Non-existence as a new legal institution of Czech law This paper deals with non-existence as a legal insitution that has been added to the traditional consequence of defective legal acts - invalidity - during the recodification of Czech private law. The aim of this diploma thesis is to comprehensively analyse the legal institution of non-existence. The paper is divided into eight chapters, the introduction and the conclusion. For the purpose of analysing non-existence comprehensively the paper focuses also on systematic explanation of legal acts themselves. The first chapter brings the definition of legal act, deals with different ways to enter into legal acts as well as forms of legal acts provided by law or by agreement of contracting parties. The second chapter focuses on describing the principles of legal act whilst aiming especially on manifestation of will as the essence of legal act. Besides that this chapter deals with creation of legal acts and their legal effects. The chapter three defines the four essential elements of legal acts - the elements of subject, the elements of will, the elements of manifestation of will and the elements of the object of legal acts. The fourt chapter continues with description of legal acts that suffer from defect in one or more of their essential elements,...

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2016-11-09T10:51:43Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Raul Lopes de Araújo Neto.pdf: 945074 bytes, checksum: 6abbbd93e7f707e998b4c9746a36867d (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-11-09T10:51:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Raul Lopes de Araújo Neto.pdf: 945074 bytes, checksum: 6abbbd93e7f707e998b4c9746a36867d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-09-14 / For granting Invalidity retirement benefit under the RGPS is necessary the occurrence of a social risk posed by a failure incapable of rehabilitation for the exercise activity that ensures the survival of the insured. Although there a legal definition of the triggering event of invalidity retirement, its legal concept is still vague, it is a vague expression, a concept whose terms are indeterminate. This uncertainty gives rise to a semantic change, suffering variations not only the natural evolution of the law, but because of criterion off disease criteria that are used to determine what is the invalidity. Currently the country has held overlaying these factors in relation to the expert medical report, proposing a change to the semantic concept of invalidity. This study aims to present a concept of legal invalidity resulting from the balance between two elements: a medical disability, represented by the medical report and social incapacity, represented by the individual, social, economic and cultural / Para a concessão do benefício de aposentadoria por invalidez, no âmbito do Regime Geral de Previdência Social (RGPS), é necessária a ocorrência de um risco social representado por uma incapacidade insusceptível de reabilitação para o exercício de atividade que garanta a subsistência do segurado. Apesar de haver a previsão legal do fato gerador da aposentadoria por invalidez, o seu conceito jurídico ainda é impreciso, uma expressão vaga, um conceito cujos termos são indeterminados. Essa imprecisão dá margem a uma mutação semântica, que sofre variações não apenas pela evolução natural do direito, mas em decorrência de critérios extradoença que são utilizados para determinar o que é a invalidez. Atualmente, a jurisprudência pátria vem sobrepondo tais fatores em relação ao laudo médico pericial, propondo uma mudança no conceito semântico da invalidez. Este estudo tem como objetivo apresentar um conceito jurídico de invalidez decorrente da ponderação entre dois elementos: a incapacidade médica – representada pelo laudo médico, e a incapacidade laboral social – representada pelos aspectos individuais, sociais, econômicos e culturais

This diploma thesis deals with two types of disputes under the Czech employment law - the employment disputes and the labor disputes. The main reason for choosing this topic of the thesis was partly due to author's personal experience with the employment dispute, the extensive judicial case law as well as some aspects of the solution of employment disputes before the court - especially the length of proceedings and the decreasing number of cases brought before the court. The first chapter of this thesis relates to procedural aspects of the employment disputes and the author analyzes the main differences between "ordinary" civil proceedings and the employment disputes proceedings. The basic difference is the appointment of the court in the employment disputes, especially the assessors, and the decision-making process of the panel of judges. The main focus of this thesis is a chapter dealing with the employment disputes about the invalidity of the termination of employment, especially focusing on the substantive legislation of each of the methods of the termination of employment and the basic conclusions from the case law of the general courts. Following the main chapter are also solved questions about employment disputes regarding the amount due of the wage and also the issue of disputes concerning...

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo uma adequada compreensão da decisão judicial acerca da inconstitucionalidade da norma no ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, especialmente no que diz respeito às conseqüências da inconstitucionalidade da norma e à eficácia da decisão de inconstitucionalidade. A pesquisa desenvolvida é exploratória quanto a sua técnica e explicativa quanto a seu objetivo. É exploratória, porque busca no ordenamento jurídico, na jurisprudência e na doutrina instrumentos que permitam compreender o problema da norma inconstitucional e do controle jurisdicional da constitucionalidade das normas; é explicativa quanto a seu objetivo, pois busca compreender os fenômenos jurídicos envolvidos na decisão de inconstitucionalidade, identificando os fatores que determinam ou contribuem para a inconstitucionalidade da norma e para a definição das conseqüências desta inconstitucionalidade, buscando explicar adequadamente o fenômeno da inconstitucionalidade da norma, a fim de definir como esta inconstitucionalidade se reflete na própria norma e na decisão jurisdicional que a reconhece. Deste estudo, resulta que a jurisprudência e a doutrina afirmam, de forma predominante, a nulidade da norma inconstitucional e a eficácia declaratória e ex tunc da decisão de inconstitucionalidade, indicando, contudo, que, em determinados casos, é necessário mitigar essa concepção ou abrir exceções, a fim de preservar os efeitos jurídicos ou a eficácia da norma inconstitucional. Resulta, ainda, que o ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, na medida em que consagra a supremacia e a rigidez da Constituição e se caracteriza por sua unidade e coerência, exige que a inconstitucionalidade da norma tenha como conseqüências sua invalidade — ipso jure e a partir do momento em que se verifica a inconstitucionalidade —, sua inexistência enquanto norma jurídica e sua ineficácia ― identificada esta com a incapacidade de incidir sobre os fatos e atribuir-lhes efeitos jurídicos ―, conduzindo determinando, ademais, à eficácia declaratória e ex tunc da decisão de inconstitucionalidade. Resulta, por fim, que as perplexidades apontadas por aqueles que se insurgem contra a concepção acerca da invalidade da norma inconstitucional são meramente aparentes e o próprio ordenamento jurídico possui meios para solucioná-las, sem que, para tanto, seja necessário atenuar ou abrir qualquer exceção em relação à invalidade da norma inconstitucional. O trabalho conduz, então, à conclusão de que, no ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, a norma inconstitucional padece de invalidade, inexistência e ineficácia, características que se congregam na concepção acerca da nulidade da norma inconstitucional, e que a decisão de inconstitucionalidade possui eficácia declaratória e ex tunc, sendo que essa concepção pode ser aplicada em todo e qualquer caso, sem que seja necessário mitigá-la ou excepcioná-la. / This work intends to provide an accurate understanding of court decisions declaring the unconstitutionality of legal rules under the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, especially in what regards the consequences of the unconstitutionality and the efficacy of the decision on unconstitutionality. The study is exploratory as to its method and explicative as to its objective. It is exploratory because it seeks within the legal system, case law and doctrine, instruments which allow for an understanding of what an unconstitutional rule might be while providing an account of the constitutionality control by courts; it is explicative as to its objective because it endeavors to comprehend the legal phenomena related to the declaration of unconstitutionality by identifying the determinant or contributive factors to a rule's unconstitutionality and its consequences, seeking to explain accurately this event in order to determine how it reflects on the rule itself and on the court decision that acknowledges its unconstitutionality. It turns out that the majority of both case law and doctrine considers the unconstitutional rule invalid and the effects of its court declaration to be backdated to the moment the statute was passed, indicating that in some cases it is necessary to mitigate such conception and open exceptions so as to sustain unconstitutional rule’s juridical effects. In fact, as 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil provides for the supremacy and rigidity of the Constitution, which is characterized by its cohesion and coherence, it follows that the consequences of the unconstitutionality of a rule are its invalidity – ipso iure, as from its verification – its inexistence as legal rule and its inefficacy (understood as the ability of applying to facts, in such a way as to generate legal effects), further determining the unconstitutionality decision’s declaratory and backdated efficacy. Finally, the study concludes that the problems identified by those who argue against the thesis of the invalidity of the unconstitutional rule are only apparent since the legal system itself has means to solve those problems in such a way that it is not necessary to mitigate or to open any exception to the thesis that an unconstitutional rule is invalid. The study leads to the conclusion that, within 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the unconstitutional rule is invalid, inexistent and ineffective, which are all characteristics located within the scope of a void rule, and that court decisions on the unconstitutionality of a legal rule have declaratory and backdated efficacy, which conclusion is applicable to every single case of court decisions on a rule's unconstitutionality, since there is no need for mitigation or exception.

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo uma adequada compreensão da decisão judicial acerca da inconstitucionalidade da norma no ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, especialmente no que diz respeito às conseqüências da inconstitucionalidade da norma e à eficácia da decisão de inconstitucionalidade. A pesquisa desenvolvida é exploratória quanto a sua técnica e explicativa quanto a seu objetivo. É exploratória, porque busca no ordenamento jurídico, na jurisprudência e na doutrina instrumentos que permitam compreender o problema da norma inconstitucional e do controle jurisdicional da constitucionalidade das normas; é explicativa quanto a seu objetivo, pois busca compreender os fenômenos jurídicos envolvidos na decisão de inconstitucionalidade, identificando os fatores que determinam ou contribuem para a inconstitucionalidade da norma e para a definição das conseqüências desta inconstitucionalidade, buscando explicar adequadamente o fenômeno da inconstitucionalidade da norma, a fim de definir como esta inconstitucionalidade se reflete na própria norma e na decisão jurisdicional que a reconhece. Deste estudo, resulta que a jurisprudência e a doutrina afirmam, de forma predominante, a nulidade da norma inconstitucional e a eficácia declaratória e ex tunc da decisão de inconstitucionalidade, indicando, contudo, que, em determinados casos, é necessário mitigar essa concepção ou abrir exceções, a fim de preservar os efeitos jurídicos ou a eficácia da norma inconstitucional. Resulta, ainda, que o ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, na medida em que consagra a supremacia e a rigidez da Constituição e se caracteriza por sua unidade e coerência, exige que a inconstitucionalidade da norma tenha como conseqüências sua invalidade — ipso jure e a partir do momento em que se verifica a inconstitucionalidade —, sua inexistência enquanto norma jurídica e sua ineficácia ― identificada esta com a incapacidade de incidir sobre os fatos e atribuir-lhes efeitos jurídicos ―, conduzindo determinando, ademais, à eficácia declaratória e ex tunc da decisão de inconstitucionalidade. Resulta, por fim, que as perplexidades apontadas por aqueles que se insurgem contra a concepção acerca da invalidade da norma inconstitucional são meramente aparentes e o próprio ordenamento jurídico possui meios para solucioná-las, sem que, para tanto, seja necessário atenuar ou abrir qualquer exceção em relação à invalidade da norma inconstitucional. O trabalho conduz, então, à conclusão de que, no ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, a norma inconstitucional padece de invalidade, inexistência e ineficácia, características que se congregam na concepção acerca da nulidade da norma inconstitucional, e que a decisão de inconstitucionalidade possui eficácia declaratória e ex tunc, sendo que essa concepção pode ser aplicada em todo e qualquer caso, sem que seja necessário mitigá-la ou excepcioná-la. / This work intends to provide an accurate understanding of court decisions declaring the unconstitutionality of legal rules under the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, especially in what regards the consequences of the unconstitutionality and the efficacy of the decision on unconstitutionality. The study is exploratory as to its method and explicative as to its objective. It is exploratory because it seeks within the legal system, case law and doctrine, instruments which allow for an understanding of what an unconstitutional rule might be while providing an account of the constitutionality control by courts; it is explicative as to its objective because it endeavors to comprehend the legal phenomena related to the declaration of unconstitutionality by identifying the determinant or contributive factors to a rule's unconstitutionality and its consequences, seeking to explain accurately this event in order to determine how it reflects on the rule itself and on the court decision that acknowledges its unconstitutionality. It turns out that the majority of both case law and doctrine considers the unconstitutional rule invalid and the effects of its court declaration to be backdated to the moment the statute was passed, indicating that in some cases it is necessary to mitigate such conception and open exceptions so as to sustain unconstitutional rule’s juridical effects. In fact, as 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil provides for the supremacy and rigidity of the Constitution, which is characterized by its cohesion and coherence, it follows that the consequences of the unconstitutionality of a rule are its invalidity – ipso iure, as from its verification – its inexistence as legal rule and its inefficacy (understood as the ability of applying to facts, in such a way as to generate legal effects), further determining the unconstitutionality decision’s declaratory and backdated efficacy. Finally, the study concludes that the problems identified by those who argue against the thesis of the invalidity of the unconstitutional rule are only apparent since the legal system itself has means to solve those problems in such a way that it is not necessary to mitigate or to open any exception to the thesis that an unconstitutional rule is invalid. The study leads to the conclusion that, within 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the unconstitutional rule is invalid, inexistent and ineffective, which are all characteristics located within the scope of a void rule, and that court decisions on the unconstitutionality of a legal rule have declaratory and backdated efficacy, which conclusion is applicable to every single case of court decisions on a rule's unconstitutionality, since there is no need for mitigation or exception.

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo uma adequada compreensão da decisão judicial acerca da inconstitucionalidade da norma no ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, especialmente no que diz respeito às conseqüências da inconstitucionalidade da norma e à eficácia da decisão de inconstitucionalidade. A pesquisa desenvolvida é exploratória quanto a sua técnica e explicativa quanto a seu objetivo. É exploratória, porque busca no ordenamento jurídico, na jurisprudência e na doutrina instrumentos que permitam compreender o problema da norma inconstitucional e do controle jurisdicional da constitucionalidade das normas; é explicativa quanto a seu objetivo, pois busca compreender os fenômenos jurídicos envolvidos na decisão de inconstitucionalidade, identificando os fatores que determinam ou contribuem para a inconstitucionalidade da norma e para a definição das conseqüências desta inconstitucionalidade, buscando explicar adequadamente o fenômeno da inconstitucionalidade da norma, a fim de definir como esta inconstitucionalidade se reflete na própria norma e na decisão jurisdicional que a reconhece. Deste estudo, resulta que a jurisprudência e a doutrina afirmam, de forma predominante, a nulidade da norma inconstitucional e a eficácia declaratória e ex tunc da decisão de inconstitucionalidade, indicando, contudo, que, em determinados casos, é necessário mitigar essa concepção ou abrir exceções, a fim de preservar os efeitos jurídicos ou a eficácia da norma inconstitucional. Resulta, ainda, que o ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, na medida em que consagra a supremacia e a rigidez da Constituição e se caracteriza por sua unidade e coerência, exige que a inconstitucionalidade da norma tenha como conseqüências sua invalidade — ipso jure e a partir do momento em que se verifica a inconstitucionalidade —, sua inexistência enquanto norma jurídica e sua ineficácia ― identificada esta com a incapacidade de incidir sobre os fatos e atribuir-lhes efeitos jurídicos ―, conduzindo determinando, ademais, à eficácia declaratória e ex tunc da decisão de inconstitucionalidade. Resulta, por fim, que as perplexidades apontadas por aqueles que se insurgem contra a concepção acerca da invalidade da norma inconstitucional são meramente aparentes e o próprio ordenamento jurídico possui meios para solucioná-las, sem que, para tanto, seja necessário atenuar ou abrir qualquer exceção em relação à invalidade da norma inconstitucional. O trabalho conduz, então, à conclusão de que, no ordenamento jurídico erigido sob a Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988, a norma inconstitucional padece de invalidade, inexistência e ineficácia, características que se congregam na concepção acerca da nulidade da norma inconstitucional, e que a decisão de inconstitucionalidade possui eficácia declaratória e ex tunc, sendo que essa concepção pode ser aplicada em todo e qualquer caso, sem que seja necessário mitigá-la ou excepcioná-la. / This work intends to provide an accurate understanding of court decisions declaring the unconstitutionality of legal rules under the 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, especially in what regards the consequences of the unconstitutionality and the efficacy of the decision on unconstitutionality. The study is exploratory as to its method and explicative as to its objective. It is exploratory because it seeks within the legal system, case law and doctrine, instruments which allow for an understanding of what an unconstitutional rule might be while providing an account of the constitutionality control by courts; it is explicative as to its objective because it endeavors to comprehend the legal phenomena related to the declaration of unconstitutionality by identifying the determinant or contributive factors to a rule's unconstitutionality and its consequences, seeking to explain accurately this event in order to determine how it reflects on the rule itself and on the court decision that acknowledges its unconstitutionality. It turns out that the majority of both case law and doctrine considers the unconstitutional rule invalid and the effects of its court declaration to be backdated to the moment the statute was passed, indicating that in some cases it is necessary to mitigate such conception and open exceptions so as to sustain unconstitutional rule’s juridical effects. In fact, as 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil provides for the supremacy and rigidity of the Constitution, which is characterized by its cohesion and coherence, it follows that the consequences of the unconstitutionality of a rule are its invalidity – ipso iure, as from its verification – its inexistence as legal rule and its inefficacy (understood as the ability of applying to facts, in such a way as to generate legal effects), further determining the unconstitutionality decision’s declaratory and backdated efficacy. Finally, the study concludes that the problems identified by those who argue against the thesis of the invalidity of the unconstitutional rule are only apparent since the legal system itself has means to solve those problems in such a way that it is not necessary to mitigate or to open any exception to the thesis that an unconstitutional rule is invalid. The study leads to the conclusion that, within 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the unconstitutional rule is invalid, inexistent and ineffective, which are all characteristics located within the scope of a void rule, and that court decisions on the unconstitutionality of a legal rule have declaratory and backdated efficacy, which conclusion is applicable to every single case of court decisions on a rule's unconstitutionality, since there is no need for mitigation or exception.

A qualitative study of how Småland local media depict Florence Stephen's declaration of invalidity This is a study that deals with the way in which Florence Stephen's declaration of affairs is viewed from the perspective of the local press. Previous research done in the field shows that Stephen was declared invalid on February 23, 1957, and the proposal for this was already taken on October 27, 1956. To complete the study, a qualitative text analysis has been conducted. This has been done with help from the newspapers Smålandsposten, Kronobergaren and Växjöbladet. Lukes and Focault's power perspective has been used as theoretical tools to analyze the results of the study. The result of the study shows that the papers depict the course starting from the first hearing on January 17, 1957 until Stephens asks himself unauthorized. Until her declaration of confidentiality, the newspapers write partly why the decision on her declaration of invalidity was taken and partly who made the decision. In newspapers, it is also possible to read that Stephen opposed the decision and fought for his authority. In addition, historical perspectives are presented regarding the negative development that occurred during her time as a user owner.