Este trabalho investiga as relações entre a regra da maioria e o princípio do dano de John Stuart Mill. Em suma, seu objetivo é descobrir de que maneira o princípio do dano funciona como um limite à regra da maioria. Diante disso, ao longo desta dissertação, examinam-se as dificuldades enfrentadas por Mill para conciliar utilitarismo e democracia, liberdade e razão. Este trabalho analisa, também, algumas ideias permanentemente presentes na reflexão histórica sobre o liberalismo: os conceitos de liberdade positiva e liberdade negativa; os diversos conceitos de paternalismo; e as muitas críticas dirigidas à regra da maioria / This investigation studies the link between the majority rule and the harm principle by John Stuart Mill. To sum up, the purpose is to find out how the harm principle operates as a limit on majority rule. As a result, throughout this study, we examine the difficulties faced by Mill to reconcile utilitarianism and democracy, liberty and reason. This dissertation analyzes, still, some ideas that were constantly present in historical reflection about liberalism: the concept of the positive liberty and the concept of negative liberty; the various concepts of paternalism; and the many criticisms of the majority rule.

Este trabalho investiga as relações entre a regra da maioria e o princípio do dano de John Stuart Mill. Em suma, seu objetivo é descobrir de que maneira o princípio do dano funciona como um limite à regra da maioria. Diante disso, ao longo desta dissertação, examinam-se as dificuldades enfrentadas por Mill para conciliar utilitarismo e democracia, liberdade e razão. Este trabalho analisa, também, algumas ideias permanentemente presentes na reflexão histórica sobre o liberalismo: os conceitos de liberdade positiva e liberdade negativa; os diversos conceitos de paternalismo; e as muitas críticas dirigidas à regra da maioria / This investigation studies the link between the majority rule and the harm principle by John Stuart Mill. To sum up, the purpose is to find out how the harm principle operates as a limit on majority rule. As a result, throughout this study, we examine the difficulties faced by Mill to reconcile utilitarianism and democracy, liberty and reason. This dissertation analyzes, still, some ideas that were constantly present in historical reflection about liberalism: the concept of the positive liberty and the concept of negative liberty; the various concepts of paternalism; and the many criticisms of the majority rule.

No description available.

"Mémoire présenté à la faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)" / Depuis l'avènement de la Loi sur la clarté, remettant expressément en cause la validité de la règle de la majorité, ainsi que la célèbre maxime « une personne, une voix », au profit d'une majorité dite « claire », dans le cas d'un référendum québécois visant à se « séparer » du reste du Canada, ce mémoire tente de faire la lumière et d'analyser la validité ainsi que les fondements de cette règle historique du 50% + 1. Ainsi, tant à l'aide des thèses contemporaines qu'historiques, il importe de faire ressortir les différents arguments avancés de part et d'autre et de les replacer dans le présent contexte du Renvoi relatif à la sécession du Québec, menant à l'adoption de la Loi sur la clarté. Finalement, grâce aux récents référendums tenus à l'échelle mondiale, il sera dès lors possible de vérifier la validité de cette règle aux· niveaux national et intemational. / Since the enactment of the Clarity Act, which repudiated the validity of the majority rule and the famous maxim "one person, one vote", for the benefit of a so-called "clear" majority, this essay attempts to bring to light the validity and the foundation of the historical 50% + 1 rule, in the event of a referendum by the province of Quebec pursuant to "secede" from Canada. Thereby, by examining either the contemporary as weil as the historical justifications in favor of the majority rule, one ought to examine the different arguments put forward by either side of the political specter and try to interpret them in the context of the Secession Reference, which lead to the adoption of the Clarity Act. Analyzing the recent referendums held around the world, 1 will thereby try to examine the validity ofthe majority rule at the national and internationallevels.

Depuis l'avènement de la Loi sur la clarté, remettant expressément en cause la validité de la règle de la majorité, ainsi que la célèbre maxime « une personne, une voix », au profit d'une majorité dite « claire », dans le cas d'un référendum québécois visant à se « séparer » du reste du Canada, ce mémoire tente de faire la lumière et d'analyser la validité ainsi que les fondements de cette règle historique du 50% + 1. Ainsi, tant à l'aide des thèses contemporaines qu'historiques, il importe de faire ressortir les différents arguments avancés de part et d'autre et de les replacer dans le présent contexte du Renvoi relatif à la sécession du Québec, menant à l'adoption de la Loi sur la clarté. Finalement, grâce aux récents référendums tenus à l'échelle mondiale, il sera dès lors possible de vérifier la validité de cette règle aux· niveaux national et intemational. / Since the enactment of the Clarity Act, which repudiated the validity of the majority rule and the famous maxim "one person, one vote", for the benefit of a so-called "clear" majority, this essay attempts to bring to light the validity and the foundation of the historical 50% + 1 rule, in the event of a referendum by the province of Quebec pursuant to "secede" from Canada. Thereby, by examining either the contemporary as weil as the historical justifications in favor of the majority rule, one ought to examine the different arguments put forward by either side of the political specter and try to interpret them in the context of the Secession Reference, which lead to the adoption of the Clarity Act. Analyzing the recent referendums held around the world, 1 will thereby try to examine the validity ofthe majority rule at the national and internationallevels. / "Mémoire présenté à la faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)"

abstract: One theoretical research topic in organizational economics is the information issues raised in different organizations. This has been extensively studied in last three decades. One common feature of these research is focusing on the asymmetric information among different agents within one organization. However, in reality, we usually face the following situation. A group of people within an organization are completely transparent to each other; however, their characters are not known by other organization members who are outside this group. In my dissertation, I try to study how this information sharing would affect the outcome of different organizations. I focus on two organizations: corporate board and political parties. I find that this information sharing may be detrimental for (some of) the members who shared information. This conclusion stands in contrast to the conventional wisdom in both corporate finance and political party literature. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Economics 2014

This study critically and systematically analyses the purported democratic values of freedom and equality with a view to clarifying the meaning of the concepts of democracy, freedom and equality; and examining the nature of the relations between kinds of freedom and kinds of equality, their association with democracy, and assessing their reconcilability within the two broad schools of democratic theory, namely, Anglo American democratic theory and Continental democratic theory. Put slightly differently, the issue is whether freedom and equality are mutually compatible or incompatible within democratic contexts. The analysis necessitates exploring the possible reason or reasons for the reconcilability or incompatibility of freedom and equality. Hence, the arguments in democratic literature relevant to the meanings of freedom and equality, and the relations between them will be examined. The first set of arguments concern the question of whether kinds of freedom endanger kinds of equality, and conversely, whether kinds of equality erode or hamper kinds of freedom. The relation existing between freedom and equality, and equality and freedom, in both instances purport to demonstrate the tension existing between them in theory as well as in practice. The second set of arguments concern the question of whether kinds of freedom promote kinds of equality, and conversely, whether kinds of equality further kinds of freedom. The relation in both instances is deemed to demonstrate the affinity between freedom and equality, and equality and freedom. An attempt will thus be made to address the issue of the seemingly confusing array of meanings of democracy, freedom and equality, and the potentially problematic relations between them, and particularly those between freedom and equality as represented by the two sets of arguments within appropriate democratic contexts. The study will endeavour to examine the analytic and synthetic interplay of meanings and relations, their nature and compatibility or incompatibility, and the possible reasons for this state of affairs, in an attempt to identify and address the perceived misapprehensions concerning their meanings and relations in democratic literature. / Political Sciences / D. Litt. et Phil. (Politics)

Text in Afrikaans / Daar is 'n toenemende bewuswording van die noodsaaklikheid van effektiewe beskerming vir minderhede. Die rede vir hierdie toenemende erkenning aan die behoefte aan minderheidsbeskerming is waarskynlik toe te skryf aan die beset dat dit nie alleen die minderheidsaandeelhouers is wat skade ly in geval van benadelende optrede nie, maar ook die ekonomie. Maatskappye word ingevolge die beginsel van meerderheidsbewind bestuur, met die gevolg dat die minderheid onderworpe is aan die wil van die meerderheid. Die minderheid kan hulself hierdeur in 'n onbenydenswaardige posisie bevind, veral indien die meerderheid hul mag aanwend om hul eie belange te bevorder. Gemeenregtelik is die reel in Foss v Harbottle 'n struikelblok vir minderheidsaandeelhouers wat gedingvoering beoog. In 'n poging om die gebrekkige gemeenregtelike beskerming van minderhede te ondervang, is bepaalde statutere maatreels ingevoer. Die evaluasie van hierdie maatreels geskied aan die hand van 'n regsvergelykende ondersoek na verskeie buitelandse stelsels, waarvan die van Nieu-Seeland en Kanada uit staan vanwee die innoverende aard van hul statutere beskermingsmaatreels. Die gevolgtrekking is dat die beskerming wat die Suid-Afrikaanse statutere maatreels aan minderhede bied, onbevredigend is om verskeie redes. Eerstens is hierdie maatreels dikwels te eng bewoord wat daartoe lei dat die aanwendingsveld van die maatreels beperk is. Tweedens hou die maatreels nie tred met ontwikkelings elders in die wereld en veranderende omstandighede en behoeftes in die praktyk nie. Derdens ontbreek goed geformuleerde remedies wat aanvullend tot artikel 252 van die Wet sal wees. Daar is verder bevind dat ad hocwysigings van bestaande maatreels nie die gewenste resultaat gaan bereik nie en 'n algehele hervorming van die Suid-Afrikaanse maatskappyereg word aanbeveel. Ten slotte word konkrete voorstelle in die vorm van konsepwetgewing gemaak en word vergesel van verduidelikende notas. Hierdie wetgewing is hoofsaaklik aan die hand van die Nieu-Seelandse en Kanadese modelle geformuleer. / There is a growing awareness of the need for effective protection of minority shareholders. This can probably be ascribed to the acknowledgement of the fact that prejudicial conduct harms not only minority shareholders, but also the economy at large. Companies are governed by the principle of majority rule; consequently the minority is subjected to the will of the majority. This often places the minority in an invidious position, especially when the majority use their power to further their own interests. The rule in Foss v Harbottle presents a stumbling block to minority shareholder action. Certain statutory measures have been introduced in an effort to counter defective minority protection. These statutory measures are evaluated in the light of a comparative study of several foreign jurisdictions, the most prominent of which are New Zealand and Canada, because of the innovative nature of the measures which they employ. The conclusion arrived at is that, for various reasons, the protection afforded minorities by the South African statutory measures is unsatisfactory. Firstly, the wording of these measures is narrowly construed; this in turn results in a narrow field of application. Secondly, these measures are not in step with developments elsewhere in the world and with the changing circumstances and needs in practice. Thirdly, well-formulated remedies needed in order to supplement section 252 of the Act are non-existent. It has also been found that ad hoc amendments of existing measures will not achieve the required result, and consequently a complete reform of South African company law is recommended. Finally, specific recommendations in the form of draft legislation are made; these are accompanied by explanatory notes. This draft legislation was formulated primarily along the lines of the New Zealand and Canadian models. / Private Law / LL.D.

A tese propõe uma análise multidisciplinar e dogmática da arbitragem societária, notadamente do processo de inclusão de cláusula compromissória no estatuto social de sociedades anônimas fechadas, com base em uma deliberação assemblear tomada pela regra da maioria (fase pré-arbitral). O ponto de partida do trabalho é o exame da dimensão jurídica do contrato de sociedade aliado à verificação dos limites da autonomia privada dos sócios na definição da estrutura do negócio jurídico societário, à compreensão da categoria dos direitos subjetivos e dos traços fundamentais que formam a tipologia das anônimas fechadas, incluindo o tratamento dado aos direitos individuais dos acionistas. Ato contínuo, desloca-se a discussão para as esferas arbitral e constitucional, com especial atenção para os pressupostos da arbitragem como método de resolução de conflitos. O cerne do trabalho reside na relação entre a situação subjetiva ativa do acionista de manifestar sua vontade favorável ou contrariamente à escolha da arbitragem e a eficácia da regra da maioria como pilar de funcionamento das sociedades anônimas. Sustenta-se que a escolha da arbitragem constitui um direito fundamental de todo o acionista, cuja renúncia depende de manifestação, expressa ou tácita, de sua vontade, a qual não pode ser elidida ou alterada pelo estatuto ou pela assembleia geral majoritária sem o seu consentimento. Após examinar as correntes doutrinárias sobre o tema no Brasil e as possíveis alternativas para resolver o imbróglio, o estudo concluiu que a alteração legislativa que cria uma hipótese adicional de recesso representa a melhor solução para a problemática. / The thesis examines arbitration in corporate law, namely the inclusion of a statutory arbitration clause in the by-laws of a closely held corporation based on a deliberation taken by the majority rule (pre-arbitration phase). The study starts by analyzing the legal aspects of the corporate contract together with the limits of shareholders autonomy in defining the structure of such contract and the characteristics that form the typology of corporations, including shareholders individual rights. The discussion then moves on the arbitration and constitutional spheres, particularly to the premises of arbitration as a form of settling conflicts. The core of the thesis is the relation between the prerogative of a shareholder to express its will in favor of or against arbitration and the incidence of the full effects of the majority rule as an essential element in the structure of a corporation. The study sustains that the choice for arbitration is a fundamental right of all shareholders, which is why renunciation depends on their express or tacit individual manifestation and therefore, majority deliberation cannot in itself insert or remove it from by-laws. Finally, the thesis provides different scholars understandings on the issue as well as the main possible alternatives to dealt with it. The creation of an additional hypothesis of appraisal right within the existing law is suggested as the best solution to solve this conundrum.

In this study I analyse the performance of a democratic decision-making rule: the weighted majority rule. It assigns to each voter a number of votes that is proportional to her stakes in the decision. It has been shown that, for collective decisions with two options, the weighted majority rule in combination with self-interested voters maximises the common good when the latter is understood in terms of either the sum-total or prioritarian sum of the voters’ well-being. The main result of my study is that this argument for the weighted majority rule — that it maximises the common good — can be improved along the following three main lines. (1) The argument can be adapted to other criteria of the common good, such as sufficientarian, maximin, leximin or non-welfarist criteria. I propose a generic argument for the collective optimality of the weighted majority rule that works for all of these criteria. (2) The assumption of self-interested voters can be relaxed. First, common-interest voters can be accommodated. Second, even if voters are less than fully competent in judging their self-interest or the common interest, the weighted majority rule is weakly collectively optimal, that is, it almost certainly maximises the common good given a large numbers of voters. Third, even for smaller groups of voters, the weighted majority rule still has some attractive features. (3) The scope of the argument can be extended to decisions with more than two options. I state the conditions under which the weighted majority rule maximises the common good even in multi-option contexts. I also analyse the possibility and the detrimental effects of strategic voting. Furthermore, I argue that self-interested voters have reason to accept the weighted majority rule.