REŠOVSKÁ Radka: Participants of the civil proceedings. [Graduation theses] / Radka Rešovská - Charles University in Prague. Faculty of Law, Department of Civil Law. - Head of the Graduation theses: doc. JUDr. Alena Macková, Ph.D, Prague: PrF UK, 2011. The graduation theses deal with contemporary legal regulations of the civil proceeding participants. A big attention was dedicated to particular definitions of the participants within contentious and non-contentious proceedings. The presumptions are being analysed of which a certain person can become the participant in proceedings and the presumptions of which the participant in proceedings is legitimated to act on his/her own behalf in the trial. Object of theses are also different kinds of representation of the participants, i.e. representation at law, representation at judicial decision or representation under the power of attorney. A relevant part of theses is characteristics of the principle of equality which is reflected in status of participants of the civil proceedings and is a part of the right of due process. A body of the fundamental procedural rights and duties of participants is being presented which constitute the content of procedural relations realized by this way. Attention is concentrated on joinder of participants which are being...

Deux décennies après l’adoption de la Convention relative au statut des réfugiés en 1951, l’affluence du nombre de réfugiés réclamant l’asile aux frontières occidentales a mené les États européens à instaurer des règles restrictives pour dissuader les demandeurs d’asile à se réclamer de cette protection internationale au sein de leurs territoires respectifs. Une des mesures préventives récentes est la directive sur « Pays d’origine sûrs » (POS) dont l’objectif est d’identifier les requérants non éligibles à recevoir la protection internationale, car issus de pays considérés sécuritaires. Ce travail de recherche propose une étude comparative entre les directives de l’Union européenne adoptées en 2005, puis réformées en 2013 et la Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés en vigueur au Canada. D’une part, nous analysons l’impact néfaste de cette directive dissuasive sur les droits fondamentaux des demandeurs d’asile en provenance de pays d’origine désignés, notamment en ce qui a trait à leur droit à une entrevue individuelle ainsi que leur droit d’en appeler de la décision qui a été prise et leur refusant l’asile. D’autre part, nous démontrerons comment l’étendue des limites substantielles à l’égard des droits fondamentaux des demandeurs d’asile en provenance des POS est contradictoire avec les obligations constitutionnelles de l’UE et du Canada, notamment celles formulées dans la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne, la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme et la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés. Bien que l’élaboration et l’application des règles adoptées par les systèmes juridiques mentionnés souffrent de plusieurs défauts violant les droits fondamentaux des demandeurs d’asile en provenance de pays d’origine désignés, nous démontrerons que l’approche du Canada a des conséquences plus draconiennes sur des demandeurs d’asile en provenance de POS que celles découlant de la loi commune applicable dans l’UE. Finalement, nous conclurons que les États occidentaux ne devraient pas se limiter à une solution à court terme telle celle du POS. Ces États devraient avoir plus de responsabilités et offrir une protection internationale accrue en soutenant les pays près de zones de conflits tout en établissant un programme réaliste permettant d’accueillir un nombre précis de réfugiés tous les ans. Mots Clés : Pays d’origine sûrs – Pays d’origine désignés – Droits humains – Droits procéduraux – Droit à l’entrevue individuelle – Droit d’appel – l’Union européenne – Canada – Réfugiés requérants – Demandeurs d’asile / Two decades following the adoption of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the growing number of asylum seekers arriving at the Western countries’ borders convinced European States to put in place new asylum rules to prevent asylum seekers from reaching their borders and dissuade the potential refugee applicants from seeking international protection in their respective territories. One of the most recent preventive measures has been the “Safe Countries of Origin” rule (hereafter SCO) whose main purpose is to identify and reject refugee applicants who are not in real need of international protection since they originate from countries which are deemed generally safe. In this research, we conduct a comparative study between the European Union’s Directives adopted in 2005 and recasted in 2013, and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act enacted by the Canada. At the first step, we intend to verify the adverse impact of this deterrent rule, during the expeditious determination procedure, on the SCO asylum seekers’ fundamental human rights including the right to personal interview and the right to appeal. At the second step, our objective is to demonstrate to which extent the fundamental human rights limitations imposed on SCO asylum seekers are in contradiction with the EU’s and Canada’s constitutional obligations undertaken respectively in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Based on this comparative research we illustrate that, while the elaboration and the application of the SCO rule in both the above-mentioned legal systems suffer from inherent flaws which infringe the basic human rights of SCO refugee applicants, Canada’s approach has had more drastic consequences on the SCO refugee applicants than those resulting from the EU’s common asylum law. Finally, we conclude that, instead of a short-term solution such as the SCO rule, the Western States must accept more responsibilities in providing international protection by supporting the countries that border the crisis zones, and establishing a workable program to accept a specific number of asylum seekers every year. Keywords: Safe Countries of Origin - Designated Countries of Origin - Human Rights -Procedural Rights - Right to Personal Interview - Right to Appeal - the European Union - Canada - Refugee Applicants - Asylum Seekers

La recherche vise à vérifier si et comment, au niveau de l’UE, la lutte contre la criminalité (surtout organisée) est conduite dans le respect de droits et libertés fondamentales, et si la coopération en matière entre les États membres peut promouvoir des standards de protection élevés et homogènes. La traditionnelle reluctance des États à confier les relatives compétences à l’Union a fortement entravé le développement d’un « espace de liberté, sécurité et justice » équilibré. Aujourd’hui le Traité de Lisbonne fournit des outils importants. Après avoir présenté la sécurité dans l’UE, j’aborde la coopération judiciaire pénale. J’analyse la riche production normative à finalité répressive, aussi que les mesures récemment adoptées à finalité protectrice et promotionnelle. Ensuite, je passe à la coopération policière et à l’intervention de l’EU en matière financière / patrimoniale, en tandem avec les droits à la protection des données personnelles et de la propriété privé. / The research aims to verify whether and how, at the EU level, the fight against crime (particularly organized crime) is perpetuated in full respect of fundamental rights and freedoms, and whether cooperation among Member States in this field can promote high and homogeneous standards of protection.The historical reluctance of Member States to give the relative competences to the Union has strongly obstructed the development of an equilibrated “area of freedom, security and justice”. However, the Lisbon Treaty has provided important tools. After firstly presenting security in the EU, I discuss judicial cooperation in criminal matters. Both the rich normative production aimed at repression, and the more recently adopted measures finalized at guarantying and promoting individual rights are analyzed. Then, I pass to police cooperation and EU financial / patrimonial intervention, together with the right to protection of personal data and the right to property - the two most at stake.

South Africa's transition to constitutional democracy marked the end of a system of government that perpetuated injustice on the basis of race. The previous system of government, underpinned by the principle of parliamentary supremacy, did not only exclude the majority of the population from public governance processes, it also economically exploited the majority of the population. As such, it laid the foundation for widespread poverty and inequalities in access to basic services. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution), is committed to correcting these past injustices and aims to establish a society based on social justice. This constitutional vision finds expression in the notion of transformative constitutionalism. Klare introduced the notion of transformative constitutionalism over a decade ago. For purpose of this thesis, the notion represents the socio-economic and political vision of post-apartheid South Africa to eradicate extreme poverty and inequalities in access to basic services as well as establish a democratic system of government that is inclusive, caring, participatory, representative and accountable. It captures the constitutional commitment to establish and maintain a society based on social justice by inter alia, eradicating poverty and inequalities in access to social services. The realisation of the socio-economic rights entrenched in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution (by all organs of state) is one of the ways in which to contribute towards meeting this transformative constitutional mandate, and by extension, striving towards the attainment of social justice. Although transformative constitutionalism and the achievement of a socially just society remain an ideal, the Constitution as the supreme law in the country, obligates the state, constitutive of public and private entities, to work towards its realisation, to the fullest extent possible. As part of post-apartheid institutional transformation, the Constitution established three spheres of government – national, provincial and local - which are distinct, interrelated and interdependent. All three spheres are obliged to operate in accordance with the principles of co-operative government and intergovernmental relations and are co-responsible for realising a number of constitutional objectives. Since 1996, the Constitution obliges local government (municipalities) to play an expanded "developmental" role. This has marked a move away from local government being regarded as merely a service delivery arm of government. xii The extended function of local government that came about with the constitutional dispensation finds expression in the notion of "developmental local government". This study is based on the premise that developmental local government must and can, together with the authorities in the other two spheres, contribute to transformative constitutionalism and social justice. Primarily, this study questions the extent to which the legal and policy framework on local government in South Africa enable local government (municipalities) to contribute towards realising the constitutional socio-economic rights underpinning the mandate of transformative constitutionalism. This study presents a review of relevant literature in order to establish links between the theoretical concepts underpinning this thesis. It examines the legal and policy framework on "developmental" local government in South Africa and analyses the central legal framework for the realisation of socio-economic rights at the local government level. In addition, the study explores the relevance and potential of local government indigent policies and Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) - as legally prescribed governance instruments - in contributing towards a more just society by examining their underlying legal and policy framework. It further distils from the theories and perspectives of social justice, benchmarks to guide local government towards achieving the transformative constitutional mandate aimed at social justice. Based on the legal, policy and other gaps identified, recommendations are made on how to optimise the potential of IDPs and municipal indigent policies in contributing towards achieving social justice. / PhD (Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

South Africa's transition to constitutional democracy marked the end of a system of government that perpetuated injustice on the basis of race. The previous system of government, underpinned by the principle of parliamentary supremacy, did not only exclude the majority of the population from public governance processes, it also economically exploited the majority of the population. As such, it laid the foundation for widespread poverty and inequalities in access to basic services. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution), is committed to correcting these past injustices and aims to establish a society based on social justice. This constitutional vision finds expression in the notion of transformative constitutionalism. Klare introduced the notion of transformative constitutionalism over a decade ago. For purpose of this thesis, the notion represents the socio-economic and political vision of post-apartheid South Africa to eradicate extreme poverty and inequalities in access to basic services as well as establish a democratic system of government that is inclusive, caring, participatory, representative and accountable. It captures the constitutional commitment to establish and maintain a society based on social justice by inter alia, eradicating poverty and inequalities in access to social services. The realisation of the socio-economic rights entrenched in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution (by all organs of state) is one of the ways in which to contribute towards meeting this transformative constitutional mandate, and by extension, striving towards the attainment of social justice. Although transformative constitutionalism and the achievement of a socially just society remain an ideal, the Constitution as the supreme law in the country, obligates the state, constitutive of public and private entities, to work towards its realisation, to the fullest extent possible. As part of post-apartheid institutional transformation, the Constitution established three spheres of government – national, provincial and local - which are distinct, interrelated and interdependent. All three spheres are obliged to operate in accordance with the principles of co-operative government and intergovernmental relations and are co-responsible for realising a number of constitutional objectives. Since 1996, the Constitution obliges local government (municipalities) to play an expanded "developmental" role. This has marked a move away from local government being regarded as merely a service delivery arm of government. xii The extended function of local government that came about with the constitutional dispensation finds expression in the notion of "developmental local government". This study is based on the premise that developmental local government must and can, together with the authorities in the other two spheres, contribute to transformative constitutionalism and social justice. Primarily, this study questions the extent to which the legal and policy framework on local government in South Africa enable local government (municipalities) to contribute towards realising the constitutional socio-economic rights underpinning the mandate of transformative constitutionalism. This study presents a review of relevant literature in order to establish links between the theoretical concepts underpinning this thesis. It examines the legal and policy framework on "developmental" local government in South Africa and analyses the central legal framework for the realisation of socio-economic rights at the local government level. In addition, the study explores the relevance and potential of local government indigent policies and Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) - as legally prescribed governance instruments - in contributing towards a more just society by examining their underlying legal and policy framework. It further distils from the theories and perspectives of social justice, benchmarks to guide local government towards achieving the transformative constitutional mandate aimed at social justice. Based on the legal, policy and other gaps identified, recommendations are made on how to optimise the potential of IDPs and municipal indigent policies in contributing towards achieving social justice. / PhD (Law), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

O presente trabalho, plasmado em metodologia jurídica, reflete criticamente sobre o problema da motivação da sentença civil como elemento de organização e de funcionamento do Estado Constitucional Democrático de Direito. A motivação é condição essencial de jurisdicionalidade, no sentido de que sem motivação não há exercício legítimo da função jurisdicional. O trabalho faz uma abordagem da natureza da motivação como discurso justificativo, jurídico e racional, da validade dos critérios de escolha ou de valoração empregados pelo juiz em sua decisão. O raciocínio do juiz é apresentado sob dupla feição: raciocínio decisório interno (contexto de descoberta ou deliberação) e raciocínio justificativo externo (contexto de justificação ou de validação). O conjunto das funções técnico-instrumental (endoprocessual) e político-garantística (extraprocessual) é objeto de investigação. A motivação, nos planos teórico e prático, exerce também a função de garantia do garantismo processual. A tese da inexistência jurídica da sentença tem três eixos teóricos: omissão total da motivação gráfica; falta de motivação ideológica, equiparada à hipótese de ausência de motivação gráfica; incompatibilidade lógica radical entre as premissas ou entre as premissas e a conclusão final, que também equivale à ausência total de motivação. O trabalho retrata um modelo de injustiça atemporal vivificado pelo juiz Crono, oposto à motivação como inestimável fator de legitimação argumentativa da jurisdição. A obrigatoriedade de motivação pública é o traço característico da jurisdição de nossa contemporaneidade e representa a maior conquista civilizatória do processo équo e justo. / This work, shaped in juridical methodology, critically reflects on the problem of motivation of civil judgment as an element of organization and functioning of the Democratic Constitutional State of Law. Motivation is an essential condition of jurisdiction, in the sense that without motivation there is no legitimate exercise of the jurisdictional function. The work makes an approach to the nature of motivation as a justificative discourse, juridical and rational, of the validity of choice or valuation criteria employed by the judge in its decision. The reasoning of the judge ispresented in double feature: internal decision-making reasoning (context of discovery or deliberation) and external justificative reasoning (context of justification or validation). The set of the technical-instrumental function (endoprocedural) and the political-rights assurance function (extraprocedural) is object of investigation. Motivation, in the theoretical and practical levels, also exerts the function of guarantee of the procedural right assuring mechanism. The thesis of the juridical validity of the judgment has three theoretical axes: total omission of the graphical motivation; lack of ideological motivation, equated to the hypothesis of nonexistence of the graphical motivation; radical logical incompatibility between the premises or between premises and the finalconclusion, which is also equivalent to the total lack of motivation. The work depicts a model of timeless injustice vivified by the judge Crono, opposite to the motivation as an invaluable factor of argumentative legitimacy of jurisdiction. Mandatory public motivation is the characteristic feature of the jurisdiction of our times and represents the greatest civilizing conquest of equal and fair proceeding.

O presente trabalho, plasmado em metodologia jurídica, reflete criticamente sobre o problema da motivação da sentença civil como elemento de organização e de funcionamento do Estado Constitucional Democrático de Direito. A motivação é condição essencial de jurisdicionalidade, no sentido de que sem motivação não há exercício legítimo da função jurisdicional. O trabalho faz uma abordagem da natureza da motivação como discurso justificativo, jurídico e racional, da validade dos critérios de escolha ou de valoração empregados pelo juiz em sua decisão. O raciocínio do juiz é apresentado sob dupla feição: raciocínio decisório interno (contexto de descoberta ou deliberação) e raciocínio justificativo externo (contexto de justificação ou de validação). O conjunto das funções técnico-instrumental (endoprocessual) e político-garantística (extraprocessual) é objeto de investigação. A motivação, nos planos teórico e prático, exerce também a função de garantia do garantismo processual. A tese da inexistência jurídica da sentença tem três eixos teóricos: omissão total da motivação gráfica; falta de motivação ideológica, equiparada à hipótese de ausência de motivação gráfica; incompatibilidade lógica radical entre as premissas ou entre as premissas e a conclusão final, que também equivale à ausência total de motivação. O trabalho retrata um modelo de injustiça atemporal vivificado pelo juiz Crono, oposto à motivação como inestimável fator de legitimação argumentativa da jurisdição. A obrigatoriedade de motivação pública é o traço característico da jurisdição de nossa contemporaneidade e representa a maior conquista civilizatória do processo équo e justo. / This work, shaped in juridical methodology, critically reflects on the problem of motivation of civil judgment as an element of organization and functioning of the Democratic Constitutional State of Law. Motivation is an essential condition of jurisdiction, in the sense that without motivation there is no legitimate exercise of the jurisdictional function. The work makes an approach to the nature of motivation as a justificative discourse, juridical and rational, of the validity of choice or valuation criteria employed by the judge in its decision. The reasoning of the judge ispresented in double feature: internal decision-making reasoning (context of discovery or deliberation) and external justificative reasoning (context of justification or validation). The set of the technical-instrumental function (endoprocedural) and the political-rights assurance function (extraprocedural) is object of investigation. Motivation, in the theoretical and practical levels, also exerts the function of guarantee of the procedural right assuring mechanism. The thesis of the juridical validity of the judgment has three theoretical axes: total omission of the graphical motivation; lack of ideological motivation, equated to the hypothesis of nonexistence of the graphical motivation; radical logical incompatibility between the premises or between premises and the finalconclusion, which is also equivalent to the total lack of motivation. The work depicts a model of timeless injustice vivified by the judge Crono, opposite to the motivation as an invaluable factor of argumentative legitimacy of jurisdiction. Mandatory public motivation is the characteristic feature of the jurisdiction of our times and represents the greatest civilizing conquest of equal and fair proceeding.

Reflet du rapport des individus avec le pouvoir public, le droit de la procédure administrative non contentieuse a sensiblement évolué depuis quatre décennies, en France comme en Grèce. Cette évolution, rattachée dans les deux pays à des projets politiques et juridiques de réforme administrative, a pu nourrir la réflexion doctrinale sur l’avènement d’une « démocratie administrative ». Or, l’évolution des règles qui concernent en particulier la procédure d’édiction de décisions individuelles répond toujours à un problème juridique aussi classique que fondamental : celui de la protection des individus vis-à-vis du pouvoir unilatéral de l’administration, dont l’exercice intervient dans la sphère des droits et libertés substantiels. Pour l’exploration de la situation juridique des administrés dans la procédure administrative non contentieuse, la prise en compte de la fonction qu’accomplissent dans cette procédure les droits procéduraux des administrés paraît dès lors nécessaire. La contribution des droits procéduraux, et plus spécialement des droits d’être entendu et à la motivation, à la protection des droits individuels substantiels mis en jeu dans l’opération normatrice de l’administration s’avère être un étalon essentiel pour la détermination de la portée juridique des droits procéduraux en cause. La qualité de ces derniers comme instruments de protection individuelle permet en effet la compréhension cohérente de l’évolution des sources juridiques des droits d’être entendu et à la motivation, de la délimitation du domaine d’application de ces droits et du traitement réservé par les juges français et grec de l’excès de pouvoir aux hypothèses de violation des mêmes droits. / Reflection of the individuals’ relation to state power, law in the field of administrative procedures has significantly evolved during the last four decades in France and in Greece.This evolution, associated in both countries with political and normative projects aspiring to administrative reform, has largely alimented doctrinal debate on the establishment of an“administrative democracy”. However, the evolution of rules governing in particular individual decision making is also a response to a classic and fundamental legal problem, namely the protection of individuals against unilateral administrative intervention in the sphere of their substantive rights and liberties. The legal status of individuals during the elaboration of individual acts deserves therefore to be explored in view of the function accomplished by procedural rights -such as the right to hearing and to reason giving- in administrative procedures of such type. In fact, the contribution of procedural rights in the protection of substantive rights concerned by the individual decision making process turns out to be crucial for the treatment of procedural rights under French and Greek administrative law. More specifically, the quality of procedural rights as instruments of individual protection allows to coherently understand the evolution of their sources and scope as well as various aspects of judicial handling of their eventual violation by administrative bodies.

1 Abstract The public administration itself is bound by applicable legal provisions. Therefore, in case of breach of individual rights stemming from the legal system of the Czech Republic, every person is guaranteed a strict legal procedure with corresponding legal mechanisms, which aim to remedy the status caused by unlawful action or inaction of the public administration. The object of this dissertation focuses, in particular, on analysis of individual means of protection of rights in public administration (i.e. the issue of the protection of public subjective rights) and their mutual relationships between them at level of legal regulation de lege lata. However, certain space had to be dedicated also to the procedures of public administration in matters related to private subjective rights as even the public administration decides on certain matters of private law. As regards the protection of private rights by public administration I mentioned the dualism of the review of decisions of public bodies and certain examples of public administration deciding on matters of private subjective rights. Further I stressed the issue of civil liability related to the conduct of public administration, i.e. liability for damages caused by unlawful decision and unlawful procedure. Pursuant to the act on liability for...

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:20:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Henrique Araujo Costa.pdf: 2539931 bytes, checksum: 9c873ec9e2f361932a9e422dd0b34bea (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-05-03 / This text proposes a comparative study of English and Brazilian civil procedure. The research approaches the judge powers, specifically the case management powers. Considering the issue s delimitation, new statutes and its practice are compared through the perspective of both countries. In conclusion, these judge powers have become similar due to the blending practices seen among different law families, as well as between different countries of the same family. However despite the convergence towards strengthening these powers the problems to be solved by these countries have distinct roots. In England the cost problem is the biggest one, while in Brazil the biggest problem is the delay. Moreover, despite their early convergence, the cultural roots of each system keep them somehow apart from one another. Thus it is not possible to state which would the best system (since they are unique) and the adoption of the English model by the Brazilian legislation should be done with caution (since the problems to be solved are different) / O presente trabalho é uma proposta de estudo comparado do direito processual civil inglês e do brasileiro. A tese é centrada no tema dos poderes do juiz, notadamente nos case management powers. Dentro do recorte proposto, são comparadas as normas e a prática judicial recentemente instituídas pelo direito de cada um dos mencionados países. Conclui-se que os poderes desses juízes tornaram-se bastante semelhantes em decorrência da assimilação mútua de práticas judiciais entre diferentes famílias do direito, bem como entre países distintos de mesma família. No entanto a despeito da convergência em torno do fortalecimento dos poderes do juiz os problemas a serem solucionados pelos referidos países têm raízes distintas. A Inglaterra tem como maior problema o custo, enquanto o Brasil tem como maior problema a demora. Ademais, a raiz cultural de cada sistema os mantém de alguma forma diferentes, apesar da aproximação recente. Por isso não é possível dizer qual dos sistemas seja melhor (já que são incomparáveis) e eventual importação do modelo inglês pela legislação brasileira precisaria ser feita com ressalvas (já que os problemas a serem solucionados são distintos)