A serious problem confronts the psychologist whose patient threatens, within the privacy of a therapy session, to inflict violent harm upon some third person. Therapists in Texas face a risk of unjust legal liability because of a lack of widely accepted, clearly and fully articulated standards. A questionnaire was submitted to Texas psychologists and Texas judges of mental illness courts. It involved a hypothetical case of a patient who threatened to kill his girlfriend. The hypothesis that no consensus exists at present among psychologists or judges appears to be supported by the data. Comparisons are made of the attitudes of psychologists and judges. Correlations between psychologist attitudes and certain demographic and practice variables are reported. The need for new legislation in Texas concerning legal liability of therapists for the violent behavior of patients is discussed. Proposed legislation for Texas is set out. Among its important features are (1) recognition that continued therapy is itself a protective strategy and (2) establishment of good faith as the standard by which the behavior of the therapist is to be judged.

This thesis identifies the financial incentives of litigants and lawyers to behave in certain ways in relation to civil litigation files. By identifying such incentives, this thesis raises questions about the extent to which substantive and procedural private law is capable of being influenced by them. Specifically, this thesis argues that: lawyers have a lawmaking function within the private law system; lawyers have financial incentives distinct from those of their clients; and the costs of retaining lawyers produce observable incentives and effects on the outcomes of civil litigation matters. In addition to the many theoretical materials cited, empirical data have been cited from research observing the legal profession in North America and elsewhere. This thesis argues that external influences--such as financial incentives for non-parties--can affect the way private law applies and develops. This thesis also identifies general regulatory strategies that might limit the influence of external factors on private law.

Le recours collectif est un moyen de procédure qui permet à une personne d'agir en demande pour le compte des membres d'un groupe dont elle fait partie. Cette procédure peut être introduite contre plus qu'un seul défendeur. On distingue deux types de recours collectifs contre plusieurs défendeurs. Il y a d'abord les recours collectifs où tous les membres du groupe ont un recours personnel contre tous les défendeurs. Il y a aussi les recours collectifs où les membres du groupe font valoir une même cause d'action à l'encontre de plusieurs défendeurs qui auraient eu un comportement fautif similaire à l'égard de l'un ou l'autre des membres du groupe. La recevabilité de ce dernier type de recours collectifs a été remise en question. Le requérant n'aurait pas l'intérêt suffisant pour ester en justice contre les défendeurs qui ne lui ont pas causé préjudice. Il ne saurait non plus satisfaire aux exigences du Code de procédure civile concernant l'autorisation du recours collectif. Or, il appert des règles mises en place en matière de recours collectif que le requérant fait valoir non seulement ses propres droits personnels, mais aussi tous ceux des membres du groupe. Ainsi, on ne peut lui reprocher l'absence d'intérêt juridique ou de cause d'action dans la mesure où il y a, pour chacun des défendeurs, au moins un membre du groupe avec un intérêt suffisant ou une cause d'action à son encontre. Les autres exigences du Code de procédure civile ne font pas, en soi, obstacle à l'autorisation d'un recours collectif contre plusieurs défendeurs. / A class action is a procedure which enables one person to sue without a mandate on behalf of aU members of a group of which he or she is a member. This procedure can be used to sue more than just one defendant. There are two different types of class actions against multiple defendants. In the frrst type, aU members have a cause of action against all defendants. There are also class actions where aU members plead an identical cause of action against multiple defendants whom wrongfuUy and similarly acted toward one of the members. The admissibility of this latter type of class actions against multiple defendants has been questioned. The petitioner would not have a sufficient legal interest to bring an action against the defendants whom did not cause him or her any prejudice. He or she would not be able to satisfy the requirements of the Code of civil procedure regarding class actions. However, it appears from the mIes that govem class actions that the petitioner pleads not only his or her personal cause of action, but also pleads the cause of action of aU group members. Thus, the petitioner cannot be reproached for not having a legal interest or a cause of action against aU defendants insofar that there is, for each defendant, at least one member of the group whom has a legal interest or a cause of action against him or her. The other requirements of the Code ofcivil procedure do not bar the authorization to institute a class action against multiple defendants.

The aim of this work is to provide a general view on legislation of enforcement of industrial property rights within the European Union with a closer focus to regulation of jurisdiction of courts to dispute resolution. The work deals with a current legislation, with jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and of czech courts and in the end it deals also with de lege ferenda and proposals of means how to improve the current legislation and make it more effective, so the competitive position of the European Union towards asian countries and towards the United States of America would strenghten.

In third-party litigation funding agreements, funders agree to finance a litigant’s litigation on condition that the funder will deduct a specified percentage from the capital awarded to the litigant in the event of success. In contingency fee agreements, such funding is provided by lawyers. Initially both these agreements were illegal in South Africa and England, but as civil courts became able to counter corruption and abuse – and with the recognition of the need to give more litigants access to justice – both were recognised as legal. Third-party litigation funding agreements by non-lawyers are unregulated in most jurisdictions. As the voluntary self-regulation in England is unsatisfactory, mandatory statutory regulation should be introduced in South Africa. The Contingency Fees Act 66 of 1997 caps the fee to 25% on the capital amount in South Africa. Since no such cap exists in Ontario (Canada), the cap of 25% in South Africa should be revised. / Eka Mintwanano yo nyika nseketelo wa mali eka nandzu wa thedi phati, vanyiki va mali va pfumela ku hakela mali ya nandzu wa mumangali hi xipimelo xa leswaku munyiki wa mali u ta susa phesenteji leyi kombisiweke ku suka eka mali leyi nyikiweke mumangali loko a humelela. Eka mintwanano ya tihakelo ta vukorhokeri, nseketelo walowo wa mali wu nyikiwa hi maloyara. Ekusunguleni mintwanano leyi hinkwayo a yi nga ri enawini eAfrika Dzonga na le England, kambe tanihi leswi tikhoto ta mfumo ti koteke ku kokela etlhelo eka timhaka ta vukungundzwana na nxaniso- na ku anakanyiwa ka xilaveko xo nyika vamangali votala mfikelelo wa vululami- hinkwayo yi anakanyiwile tanihi leyi nga enawini. Mintwanano yo nyika nseketelo wa mali eka nandzu wa thedi phati hi vanhu lava nga riki maloyara a yi lawuriwi eka vuavanyisi byotala. Tanihileswi vutilawuri byo tinyiketa eEngland byi nga riki kahle, mafambiselo ya nawu lama lavekaka ya fanele ya tivisiwa eAfrika Dzonga. Nawu wa Tihakelo ta Vukorhokeri wa 66 wa 1997 wu veka mpimo wa hakelo eka 25% eka xiphemu xa tsengo wa mali eAfrika Dzonga. Ku sukela loko ku ri hava mpimo lowu nga kona eOntario (Canada), mpimo wa 25% eAfrika Dzonga wu fanele wu langutisiwa hi vuntshwa. / Kha thendelano dza ndambedzo dza mbilo ine ya itelwa muthu, vhabadeli vho tenda u badela mbilo ya muthu o no khou itelwa mbilo tenda mubadeli a tshi ḓo ṱusa phesenthe yo tiwaho kha tshelede yo avhelwaho muthu ane a khou itelwa mbilo arali a kunda. Kha thendelano dza mbadelo dzine dza badelwa musi ramilayo o no kunda kha mulandu, mbadelo idzo dzi ṋetshedzwa nga vhoramilayo. Mathomoni thendelano idzi vhuvhili hadzo dzo vha dzi siho mulayoni Afurika Tshipembe na England, fhedzi musi khothe dza mbilo dzi tshi vho thoma u hanedzana na tshanḓanguvhoni na u tambudzwa - na u dzhiela nṱha ṱhoḓea ya u ṋea vhathu vhane vha khou itelwa mbilo u swikelela vhulamukanyi –vhuvhili hadzo dzo dzhiwa sa dzi re mulayoni. Thendelano dza ndambedzo dza mbilo ine muthu a itelwa nga vhathu vhane vha sa vhe vhoramilayo a i langulwi kha vhulamukanyi vhunzhi. Samusi u langulwa ha ndaulo nga iwe muṋe hu ha u tou funa ngei England a zwi ṱanganedzwi, ndaulo ya khombekhombe ya mulayo i fanela u ḓivhadzwa Afurika Tshipembe. Mulayo wa Mbadelo dzine dza badelwa Ramilayo musi o kunda wa nomboro 66 wa 1997 mutengo wawo u guma kha 25% mutengo wa tshelede Afurika Tshipembe. Samusi tshikalo itsho tshi sa wanali ngei Ontario (Canada), tshikalo itsho tsha 25% Afurika Tshipembe tshi fanela u sedzuluswa hafhu. / Private Law / LL. M.

Esta pesquisa caracteriza-se pela interdisciplinaridade e tem como eixo integrador o desmatamento em Assentamentos de Reforma Agrária na Amazônia Legal, sob responsabilidade do INCRA, com foco na atuação do Grupo de Trabalho Amazônia Legal - GTAL, do Ministério Público Federal - MPF e na percepção jurídico-ambiental dos assentados no Estado de Rondônia. As metodologias utilizadas foram: estudo de caso, pesquisa documental, análise de conteúdo, pesquisa de campo, entrevistas com questionários abertos e fechados e análise estatística. As principais bases teóricas utilizadas foram: Aplicação Seletiva dos Direitos Sociais, Princípio da Proporcinalidade, Justiça Ambiental Participativa, Litígio Estratégico e Voluntarismo Político. Conclui-se que as atividades do GTAL, do MPF, do INCRA e do Poder Judiciário, até o momento, neste caso específico, não envolveram os assentados, do que decorre a necessidade de maior participação desses stakeholders para ampliação de resultados positivos em casos difíceis ambientais, no manejo de litígio estratégico. / This research is characterized by interdisciplinarity and focus the deforestation in Agrarian Reform Settlements, in the Legal Amazon, under the responsibility of INCRA, in order to examine the function of the Legal Amazon Working Group (GTAL), the Federal Public Prosecutor (MPF) and the legal and environmental perception of the settlers in the State of Rondônia. The methodologies used were: case study, documentary research, content analysis, field research, interviews with open and closed questionnaires and statistical analysis. The main theoretical bases used were: Selective Application of Social Rights, Principle of Proportionality, Participatory Environmental Justice, Strategic Litigation and Political Voluntarism. It is concluded that the activities of the GTAL, Public prosecutor, INCRA and the Judiciary, so far, in this specific case, did not involve the settlers, resulting in the need for greater participation of these stakeholders to increase positive results in difficult environmental cases, in litigation management strategic.

A presente pesquisa investigou frente às subjetividades apresentadas pelas normas contábeis do International Financial Report Standards (IFRS), cuja responsabilidade por traduzir, adaptar a situações locais e acompanhar a introdução no Brasil é do Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis (CPC) e pela Legislação Tributária Brasileira, se há indícios de possibilidade de prática de Gerenciamento de Resultados (GR) via provisões relacionadas com o contencioso legal. Buscou-se também entender as singularidades da legislação tributária brasileira e os mecanismos usados na prática de GR. O procedimento Contábil, emitido pelo CPC, que disciplina a contabilização das provisões e dos ativos e passivos contingentes é o de nr. 25, uma tradução e adaptação do International Accounting Standard Nr. 37 (IAS 37), e foi o documento básico para o desenvolvimento deste trabalho. Buscou-se também entender se, após a introdução do CPC 25, houve aumento no disclosure de informações contábeis relativas a provisões e contingências pelas empresas. Como contribuição final foram explorados possíveis mecanismos para mitigar práticas de GR. A pesquisa é exploratória e triangula informações de advogados e auditores, explorando a existência e o mecanismo de GR via contencioso legal e as medidas a serem tomadas para sua mitigação. O período examinado compreende de 2006 - 2010, o qual inclui a introdução da Lei 11631 que muda a Lei das Sociedades por Ações e as normas do IFRS no Brasil. As provisões que têm origens em demandas fiscais administrativas e judiciais são elementos que podem ser manipulados pelas instituições utilizando de subjetividades existentes no entendimento e aplicação da legislação, no sentido de melhorar ou piorar o resultado contábil. A pesquisa mostrou que devido ao intrincado sistema tributário nacional, existe a possibilidade de gerenciamento de resultados via constituição ou não de provisões. Também foi confirmado que após a emissão do CPC 25, as empresas aumentaram o disclosure de informações sobre provisões, passivos e ativos contingentes. / Given the subjectivity inherent in the accounting standards of the International Financial Report Standards (IFRS) that are translated into Portuguese, adapted to local situations and monitored by the Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis (Accounting Standards Board - ASB) and the Brazilian tax legislation, the present study investigated whether there is evidence of the possible occurrence of earnings management practice through provisions related to a litigation process. Since it was an exploratory study, we also tried to understand the peculiarities of the Brazilian tax legislation and the mechanisms used in earnings management practices. The accounting procedure No 25 issued by the Accounting Standards Board (ASB), that is, ASB No 25 regulates the accounting of provisions and contingent assets and liabilities and is a translation and adaptation of the International Accounting Standard No. 37 (IAS 37). It is the document upon which this study was based. We also sought to understand whether after the introduction of the Accounting Standards Board No. 25 there was an increase in the disclosure of accounting information on provisions and contingencies by companies. As a final contribution we explored possible mechanisms to constrain earnings management practices. The study is exploratory and triangulates information from lawyers and auditors, exploring the existence and the mechanism of earnings management through a litigation process and the actions to be taken for its mitigation. The study period is 2006 - 2010, which includes the introduction of act 11631 that incorporates changes to the corporations law and IFRS standards in Brazil. The provisions originated in administrative and judicial tax demands are elements that can be handled by the institutions that use the subjectivity in the interpretation and application of legislation by users and in procedures, in order to improve or worsen the accounting result, thus configuring earnings management practice. The research has shown that due to the intricate tax system in Brazil there is the possibility of earnings management via the constitution of provisions or not. It was also confirmed that after the issuance of ASB No. 25 the companies increased the disclosure of information on provisions, liabilities, assets and contingents.

Instrument juridique au bénéfice des parties, aussi bien pour les contribuables que pour l’administration fiscale, le contentieux fiscal constitue, en principe, un observatoire propice pour mesurer la répercussion, la portée et l’efficacité de la gestion publique de l’impôt. Il sert à éprouver, dans sa généralité, la politique fiscale. C’est en ces termes que sa conceptualisation en tant que mécanisme de régulation et de modélisation s’observe. Un tel concept est essentiellement basé sur le prisme de l’indépendance du juge, de la séparation des pouvoirs, de l’effectivité du contrôle juridictionnel et par déduction de la protection des droits et garanties des parties. Pourtant, la réalité demeure très éloignée de ces aspirations. En effet, le contentieux fiscal se caractérise par trois traits significatifs, à savoir : le comportement de suprématie de l’administration fiscale, le dessaisissement du juge et par la même occasion la dépossession de la Justice au bénéfice d’un système de contractualisation de l’impôt, et enfin le déclin du droit des contribuables. Aux nombreuses prérogatives de puissance publique, que la loi attribue à l’administration fiscale, s’ajoutent les pouvoirs discrétionnaires, conférant à cette dernière un statut quasi juridictionnel. Ainsi, sur fond d’un légicentrisme exacerbé et sur une mauvaise appréhension de la notion d’intérêt général et de celle du juge de l’impôt, s’institue un véritable système atrophié, marqué par le renoncement du juge à son pouvoir et par l’affermissement du pouvoir de l’administration. Nous assistons à un débordement du pouvoir judiciaire par d’autres instances régulatrices. Le contentieux échappe au juge en faveur de l’administration, et ce dans une indifférence anormale qui s’apparente davantage à une connivence latente. Il est plus que jamais indispensable de remettre en question ces évidences, qu’elles soient liées au droit substantiel ou au droit processuel, et d’en finir avec cette forme de doxa juridique qui suppose que les règles sont immuables. De surcroit, la fiscalité est soumise au mouvement de la conjoncture, le système contentieux se doit, lui aussi, d’être évolutif, afin d’apporter des solutions juridiquement cohérentes, économiquement logiques et équitables. L’évolution et la transformation du contentieux doivent ainsi s’inscrire dans une judiciarisation de toutes les phases de la procédure. Le but est de permettre un contrôle effectif, neutre et objectif, d’éviter les décisions arbitraires ou même inégalitaires et enfin d’équilibrer les droits du contribuable et les prérogatives de l’administration. / As a legal instrument for each litigant, both for the taxpayer and for the tax administration, tax litigation is, in theory, an enabling observatory to measure the impact, the extent and the effectiveness of public policy concerning taxation. From a general point of view, it used to test in generally tax policy. Those are the terms under which its conceptualization as a control and modeling mechanism may be undertaken. Such efficient concept is essentially based upon the prism of judicial independence, separation of powers, effectiveness of judicial review, and by inference, protection of the rights and guarantees of the parties. However, the reality is very far removed from these aspirations. Indeed, tax litigation is characterized by three significant features, namely the supremacy of tax administration, the judge’s renunciation and divestment, in the same time the dispossession of Justice in favor of recourse to the contract-based solutions and the increased use of Alternative Dispute Resolution, and finally the decline of taxpayers right. To the prerogative of the public authority, expressly conferred by law upon the tax authority, are added the discretionary powers, which confers a quasi-judicial status. This way, amid a heightened legicentrisme and a misunderstanding of the concept of general interest and the role of tax judge, it results in the establishment of a real atrophied system, characterized by the judge’s renouncing his role and by the expansion of authorities’ administration. It is disappointing to note an overflow of the judiciary by other regulatory agencies. The litigation is outside judge’s control in favor of the administration, with complete indifference and appears to be more like a latent connivance. It is highly necessary to challenge things that are taken for granted, both the substantive and the procedural norms, and to deal with this form of legal orthodoxy which assumes that the rules are immutable. Furthermore, tax changes with the economic scene in constant flux, the litigation system must be also scalable, to provide legally consistent solutions, economically logical and equitable nonetheless. The evolution and the transformation of litigation should be a part of the legalization of all phases of the procedure. The aim is to enable effective control, neutral and objective, to avoid arbitrary decisions, even unequal, and finally to balance taxpayer rights and prerogatives of the administration.

Submitted by admin tede (tede@pucgoias.edu.br) on 2016-09-22T12:27:26Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Simone Sara Batista.pdf: 1294511 bytes, checksum: b5690089a49a641c2f261d320bcf916a (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-09-22T12:27:26Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Simone Sara Batista.pdf: 1294511 bytes, checksum: b5690089a49a641c2f261d320bcf916a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-07-14 / The main objective of this research was to reflect upon the communication standards of former spouses in divorce and in litigation. The theoretical framework was that of social constructionism. The focus of the methodological approach was centered on the analysis of discoursive practices. Due to this, the specific objectives presuppose the understanding of the implications of direct communication between former spouses in dispute and the comprehension of the social representations that they express by means of dialogue in relation to divorce proceedings and child custody. So that, the communication affects and is affected by the litigation. The field of this empirical research was the project Families’ Educative Justice developed by the Psychological Clinics of PUC-GO. The individuals who took part of the subproject were chosen by means of randomical way: former spouses whose age varied from 30 to 50 years old, with sons and daughters from five to 20 years old. Besides this researcher, a group of educators was composed by professors, psychologists and post-graduated students. During six meetings, the data which were collected by this researcher revealed the social phenomenum of communication between former couples when it was occurring. With the participants’ agreement, these sessions were recorded by audio broadcasting and fully transcribed in order to register the data of this research. The conclusions were that the divorce, within the marital context, is influenced by various marital ways of living, as well as the past experiences of the former couple before the divorce and the infinity of economic, social and cultural circumstances. / O objetivo principal desta dissertação foi o de refletir acerca do tema da comunicação entre ex-cônjuges no divórcio e no litígio, de acordo com o referencial teórico do construcionismo social e da metodologia qualitativa de análise de práticas discursivas. Procurou-se compreender as formas de se falar do litígio e da guarda de filhos, identificar os repertórios utilizados pelos ex-cônjuges sobre o divórcio e o litígio, e evidenciar como a comunicação influencia e é influenciada pelo litígio. O campo de pesquisa empírica foi o projeto Justiça Educativa de Famílias (JEF), desenvolvido na Clínica-Escola de Psicologia da Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Goiás, cujos instrumentos foram o diálogo e a reflexão sobre o divórcio e o litígio.Os sujeitos deste subprojeto foram escolhidos de forma randômica: quatro ex-cônjuges com idades variando de 30 a 50 anos e com filhos de cinco a 20 anos. Durante seis sessões, os dados coletados por esta pesquisadora, juntamente com uma equipe formada por educadores (professores, mestrandos, doutorandos e psicólogos), revelaram o fenômeno social da comunicação entre os ex-cônjuges nas sessões, com suas implicações para o diálogo educativo sobre o divórcio, o litígio e a guarda de filhos. Essas sessões, com o consentimento dos participantes, foram gravadas em áudio e transcritas na íntegra, para incorporar o banco de dados do campo da pesquisa. Este estudo chegou à conclusão de que a comunicação sobre o divórcio, no contexto conjugal, ocorre sob a influência de diversas vivências, bem como das experiências dos ex-cônjuges anteriores ao divórcio e da infinidade de circunstâncias econômicas, sociais e culturais a ele associadas.

La présente étude a pour objectif de démontrer que les incitations créées par la présence ou par le manque de transparence dans les coûts de justice sur la décision d'intenter un procès, sont liées de différentes manières à des degrés de certitude. / The present study has for objective to demonstrate that the incentives created by the relative existence of transparency in the costs of justice on the decision to litigate are linked in various ways to degrees of certainty.