6 Legal facts limiting work performance Abstract The aim of the final thesis is to analyse legislation of legal facts limiting work performance in Czech republic with analysis of particular legal facts limiting work performance on the side of employees and as well on the side of employers and consequences that legal facts have on another important institutes of the Labour Law. The final thesis contains six main chapters whereas the first chapter is dedicated to definition of the employment relations and individuals terms that are fundamental not only for this thesis but also for the whole Labour Law's sector. The second chapter contains analysis of the individual kinds of the legal facts limiting performance. The third chapter is focused on the legal facts limiting work performance on the side of the employee, whereas these facts are divided into three groups. The first group contains important personal obstacles to work which are named in the Labour Code, particularly in the paragraph 191, the second group contains another important obstacles to work which are exhaustively listed by the Government Ordinance No. 590/2006 and the third group is formed by the obstacles to work reasoned by the public interest. Legal facts limiting work performance on the side of the employer are presented in the fourth...

Scientific evidence is increasingly relied on in litigation. Discussions and debates aimed at enabling courts to make the best use scientific evidence are therefore critical. This thesis adds the perspective of procedural legitimacy to the science and law dialogue. Procedural Legitimacy is the concept that consistent adherence to legal procedure maintains the overall legitimacy of the legal system, and the validity of its outcomes. I argue that to maintain legitimate legal outcomes, procedural rules must be applied consistently and vigilantly to scientific evidence. This means that admissibility rules must be applied properly to scientific evidence, and that admitted scientific evidence must be duly scrutinized and weighed against the legal standard of proof. This ensures that the legal outcome will be based on valid legal facts. When the law is applied to those legal facts, litigants are legitimately bound by the judicial decision, despite the risk of factual inaccuracy. / The bulk of this thesis develops the notion of procedural legitimacy, and argues that its role in the adjudicative process is vital. The argument is founded on the conditions of uncertainty in which legal decisions are made. I show that both liability determinations and damages determinations in personal injury actions are made in conditions of uncertainty, and are dependent on consistency in procedure to maintain legitimacy. Ultimately, I apply the procedural legitimacy argument to admissibility and use of scientific evidence, and endorse the recommendations of the Goudge Inquiry in that respect.

本研究以「我國司法判決之敘事分析初探―目標可贖回遠期契約(TRF)爭議為例」，聚焦於法庭活動之司法敘事，透過對民事判決書之文本分析，探討原告及被告如何就爭議事件進行對己有利之敘事策略與方式，以及法官如何於判決書中就其認定之法律事實與因果推論撰寫判決。 本研究發現，基於「舉證責任分配原則」及「訴訟書狀撰寫規定」，原告、被告及法官之司法敘事應可區分為「故事」及「論述」二者。其中常見「夾敘夾議」文體，係為認定「法律事實」所作之論述，但常忽略提出具有連貫性且符合邏輯推論之法律事實。 而當法律爭訟發生時，雙方當事人需將自己認定之事實分以「故事」及「論述」讓法官有興趣聽、聽得懂並相信所說為實，如此才能贏得訴訟。因而「敘事」對當事人之攻防與判決書的事實建構益顯重要，司法敘事策略與方式及其意義與價值於焉產生。 / The purpose of this study is to conduct an exploratory analysis on the narratives in Taiwan’s judicial judgments by using examples of dispute cases on Target Redemption Forwards (TRF). Analyses are conducted on texts of civil judgments in order to understand how plaintiffs and defendants respectively develop their strategies and methodologies of narratives for winning cases, and how judges narrate the legal facts that they affirm as causes and consequences in their verdicts. It was discovered in the study that, based on the "principles of distribution of the burden of proof" and the "regulations on the drafting of litigation pleadings," judicial narratives made by plaintiffs, defendants and judges can be classified into two parts, namely "story" and "discourse." A frequently used form of writing, "narration interspersed with comments," is normally made for the purpose to affirm "legal facts." When a legal dispute takes place, the parties concerned are required to provide narratives (stories and discourses) in the court, including interpretation of the facts that they affirm by using relevant evidences. In order to win the case, however, the narrator must ensure that such narratives are interesting, understandable and persuasive to the judges. "Narratives," therefore, play important roles for constructing the facts by the two parties and for preparing the court verdicts. The strategies and methodologies used for judicial narratives are then of significant meanings and values.