Preparation of a hearing in the civil procedure Abstract This thesis deals with the preparation of a hearing in the civil procedure defined by its objective - to hear a case in the fastest possible manner hand in hand with provision of a brief and fair decision, in principle, in one hearing. The first chapter of this thesis is dedicated to defining the purpose of the preparation of a hearing in the civil procedure and outlines the possible differences in contentious and non- contentious proceedings. The second chapter summarizes the historical development within our territory from its very beginnings in the Middle Ages to the current legislation. Subsequently, the third chapter delves into the fundamental principles on which the civil procedure is built upon, as well as the preparation of the hearing. The foundation of this thesis is the fourth chapter, which analyses the various process and instruments of the preparation of the hearing in detail. Firstly, attention is focused on examining the proposal for proceedings' initiation, the fulfilment of the proceedings' conditions and the fee obligation. Afterwards, individual instruments are analysed in depth, for instance the call to correct a submission, the simple call for a response, the qualified call for a response, the preliminary hearing in contentious...

The thesis includes the analysis of the preliminary hearing of the indictment institute as an optional part of criminal proceedings, which follows after bringing an indictment to court. The thesis is focused on summary of theoretical findings, which draws mainly from the commentary literature, but a key focus of the thesis is the analysis of relevant judicial decisions that relate to the institute investigated. The thesis works in particular with the decisions of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic and High Courts, to a lesser extent with decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic and several regional courts are used. The text is (except introduction and conclusion) divided into eight parts. The first part contains an explanation of the concept of preliminary hearing of the indictment. Next part of the thesis is focused on the historical development of the preliminary hearing of the indictment, from 1850 to the present. This part also summarizes the most important amendments of the currently effective Criminal Procedure Code. Following parts are focused on explanation of purpose of preliminary hearing of the indictment and explanation of the difference between this and the obligatory review of indictment in accordance with § 181 par. 1 and 185 par. 1 of the Criminal Procedure...

Hearing Preparation in Contentious Procedure Abstract Hearing preparation is a key phase of civil proceedings, in which the judge, with the assistance of the parties, shall prepare the hearing effectively and consistently and subsequently takes a decision pursuant to Section 114a(1) of Act No. 99/1963 Coll., Code of Civil Procedure, as amended, at a single hearing. The aim of this diploma thesis is to carry out a comprehensive analysis of valid and effective legal regulations concerning the preparation of a hearing in contentious procedure in the Czech Republic. To fulfill this goal, this thesis is divided into six chapters. The first chapter defines the concept of hearing preparation and formulates its objectives. For the sake of clarity, hearing preparation is divided into two levels, namely the hearing preparation in terms of its form and the hearing preparation in terms of its material, the so-called proper hearing preparation. These two levels are also described in the first chapter. The second chapter briefly outlines the development of the Czech legislation on hearing preparation, paying particular attention to two important amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure, which have a common objective to strengthen the stage of hearing preparation. The third chapter introduces the individual basic...

Preparation of a hearing in the civil procedure The topic of this thesis is preparation of a hearing in civil procedure. It represents a phase of civil procedure which starts the moment the action it brought to the court and ends with the hearing itself. The hearing should be regarded as the culmination of the whole procedure, which is why the right approach to the preparation of a hearing is not any less important than the hearing itself. The aim of this thesis is to give a comprehensive overview of this issue by reviewing the past, analysing the present legislation and providing de lege ferenda reflection. The thesis is divided into three parts. The first one is a historical overview, in which the author describes the legal development of the preparation of a hearing since 19th century until present. Legal principles, that has formed during this legal evolution and that are affecting today's legislation, are described in the beginning of the second part of the thesis. Principle of concentration and of single hearing being the two most emphasized principles. The majority of the second part deals with the current legislation, which is primarily contained in the art. 114 to 114c of the Czech Civil Procedure Code. The thesis describes the specific steps that the court has to undertake after the...

Submitted by PPG Direito (ppgdir@pucrs.br) on 2018-06-25T15:39:42Z No. of bitstreams: 1 MARINA_DAMASCENO_DIS.pdf: 1287729 bytes, checksum: d08b6177aa2b3735020a5895f295cda2 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Sheila Dias (sheila.dias@pucrs.br) on 2018-06-29T17:04:41Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 MARINA_DAMASCENO_DIS.pdf: 1287729 bytes, checksum: d08b6177aa2b3735020a5895f295cda2 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-06-29T17:11:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 MARINA_DAMASCENO_DIS.pdf: 1287729 bytes, checksum: d08b6177aa2b3735020a5895f295cda2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-02-27 / Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Cient?fico e Tecnol?gico - CNPq / The present dissertation aims to analyze the jurisdictional policies that assist in the construction of a consensus culture. In order to do so, it critically investigates the propositions used in the preliminary hearing of conciliation or mediation brought by the Civil Procedure Code of 2015 (CPC/15). From a deductive approach method, starting from the ideas related to the transformation occurred in the society and, consequently, going through the consolidation of new forms to regulate litigation ? adequate methods of conflicts resolution ? concluding with the analysis of the preliminary hearing that aims the reach of consensus, foreseen in article 334 of the CPC/15. It can be concluded that a culture of consensus is not achieved by imposing a legal device, but through policies that effectively encourage its application, which cannot be restricted solely to the Judiciary. Therefore, the preliminary hearing, in essence, is beneficial to the realization of a jurisdictional policy, once it allows a consensual dialogue before a statement of defense is offered. If critically considered the models exposed by the legislator, there is a distortion in its arguments, which in article 334 prioritize the reduction of numbers through a legal imposition, thereby becoming indifferent or even harmful its application, as it ends up being considered only a mere procedural step. / A presente disserta??o tem por objeto a an?lise das pol?ticas jurisdicionais que auxiliam na constru??o de uma cultura do consenso. Para tanto, investiga criticamente as proposi??es utilizadas na audi?ncia preliminar de concilia??o ou media??o trazida pelo C?digo de Processo Civil de 2015 (CPC/15). A partir de um m?todo dedutivo de abordagem, partindo das ideias relativas ? transforma??o na sociedade e, consequentemente, ? consolida??o de novas formas de regula??o de lit?gios ? meios adequados de resolu??o de conflitos ? at? a an?lise da audi?ncia preliminar com vistas ao consenso, prevista no artigo 334 do CPC/15. Conclui-se que uma cultura voltada ao consenso n?o se concretiza com a imposi??o de um dispositivo legal, mas por meio de pol?ticas que efetivamente incentivem sua aplica??o, as quais n?o podem estar restritas unicamente ao Poder Judici?rio. Diante disso, por mais que referida audi?ncia, em sua ess?ncia, mostre-se ben?fica ? concretiza??o de uma pol?tica jurisdicional, uma vez que possibilita um di?logo consensual antes do oferecimento da contesta??o. Se considerados criticamente os moldes expostos pelo legislador, h? uma distor??o em seus fundamentos, os quais, no artigo 334, priorizam a diminui??o de n?meros por meio de uma imposi??o legal, tornando-se, desse modo, sua aplica??o indiferente ou at? mesmo prejudicial, na medida em que acaba por transform?-la, muitas vezes, em mera etapa processual.

ODPOVĚDNOST VEŘEJNÉ MOCI ZA ŠKODU - OTÁZKA PRO CIVILNÍ, NEBO SPRÁVNÍ SOUDY? Abstrakt Tato diplomová práce se věnuje tématu odpovědnosti veřejné moci za škodu, speciálně potom otázce, které soudy by měly mít pravomoc rozhodovat o této otázce, jestli soudy civilní, nebo soudy správní. V první části práce jsou vymezeny dva základní přístupy ke zkoumané otázce, přístup soukromoprávní a přístup veřejnoprávní. Rovněž jsou formulovány základní aspekty, ve kterých lze zkoumat konkrétní právní úpravu této odpovědnosti. Jedná se o aspekty hmotněprávní a aspekty procesněprávní. V druhé části je analyzována současná česká úprava. Ta vychází ze soukromoprávního pojetí. Zejména je analyzováno, jak se v jednotlivých aspektech právní úpravy projevuje její soukromoprávní pojetí, a to v kontrastu s pojetím veřejnoprávním. V souladu s judikaturou Ústavního soudu a četnou literaturou je kladen důraz na to, že by právní úprava (a případně judikatura soudů) měla dostatečně zohledňovat specifickou povahu tohoto odpovědnostního vztahu. Kriticky jsou tak nahlédnuty jak aspekty hmotněprávní, tak především aspekty procesněprávní. Z provedené analýzy vyplývá, že velmi neuspokojivá je současná úprava tzv. předběžného projednání. V případě soudního projednání je jako problematická spatřována dvojkolejnost soudní ochrany v případě škod...

Submitted by CARLA MARIA GOULART DE MORAES (carlagm) on 2015-06-24T18:22:49Z No. of bitstreams: 1 VirginiaIcleDireito.pdf: 919455 bytes, checksum: 652d8c36d0e378644606e95ab56970b0 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-06-24T18:22:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 VirginiaIcleDireito.pdf: 919455 bytes, checksum: 652d8c36d0e378644606e95ab56970b0 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-10-27 / Nenhuma / A proposta em desenvolver os processos judiciais sem dilações indevidas deve ser desenvolvida mediante práticas que estejam em concordância com os ditames Constitucionais. Para a concretização da tutela jurisdicional, é necessário que tais práticas, além de estarem em conformidade com a segurança do ordenamento jurídico e, capazes de efetivarem o direito fundamental a razoável duração do processo, contribuam, de forma efetiva, com os objetivos traçados pela Constituição. A audiência preliminar será investigada como um instrumento processual capaz de evitar dilações indevidas no decorrer dos processos, seja mediante a possibilidade de conciliação entre as partes, seja por meio do saneamento do processo. Permite a participação mais ativa dos agentes do processo, através do uso da oralidade. Neste sentido, compõe um sistema processual dinâmico, permitindo o “acesso à justiça” em sentido amplo, contemplando ao povo, a adjetivação de cidadão e difundindo a democracia participativa como proposta de Estado a ser adotada para a sociedade contemporânea. Nesse contexto, se pode vislumbrar que o dispositivo do art.331 do Código de Processo Civil Brasileiro, contribui com a efetividade do direito fundamental à razoável duração do processo, objetivando a redução da demora processual injustificável. Para tanto, cabe aos magistrados utilizarem-se de uma interpretação hermenêutica dos ditames constitucionais conjugada com os fatores externos que irão influenciá-lo. A problematização em questão pretende estudar a sociedade no momento atual, onde anseia pela consagração do direito fundamental ao processo em tempo razoável, o qual deve ser promovido por parte do Estado, já que o mesmo lhe consagrou constitucionalmente com o advento da EC 45/2004. Nesse contexto, cabe ao Estado responder pela demora injustificada dos tempos processuais. E a reparação deve manifestar-se através da indenização em favor do cidadão que teve seu direito tolhido, por conseqüência de um ato estatal, ou, no caso da audiência preliminar, sua inércia. / The proposal to develop the judicial procedures without undue delay should be developed through practices that are in accordance with the constitutional dictates. For the completion of judicial review, it is necessary that such practices, and comply with the safety of the legal system and able to enforce the fundamental right to a reasonable duration of the process, contribute, effectively, to the goals set by Constitution. The preliminary hearing will be investigated as a procedural tool that will prevent undue delays during the process, either through the possibility of conciliation between the parties, either through the restructuring process. Allows more active participation of the process’s, through the use of orality. In this sense, forms a dynamic procedural system, allowing "access to justice" in a broad sense, covering the people, the adjective of citizen participatory democracy and spreading as a proposed rule to be adopted to contemporary society. In this context, we can see that the machinery of article 331 of the Brazilian Civil Procedure Code, contributes to the effectiveness of the fundamental right of a reasonable duration of the process, aiming at the reduction of procedural delay unjustifiable. For this, use it to judges is a hermeneutic interpretation of constitutional principles coupled with external factors which will influence him, adopting the theory as formalism evaluative procedures. The questioning concerned intends to study the society at present, which yearns for the consecration of the fundamental right to process in reasonable time, which should be promoted by the state, since the constitutionally enshrined it even with the advent of constitutional emendment 45/2004. In this context, the State must answer for the undue delay of the procedural time. And the repair should be manifested through indemnity in favor of the citizen who had checked his right, as a consequence of a state act, or, if the preliminary hearing, his inertia.