The diploma thesis is focused on the assessment of the stream and the proposal against flood risk in the location of town Březová nad Svitavou. The stream Svitava flows under administration of Povodí Moravy. s. p. The stream Svitava flowing through urban area, has a high potencial flood risk. The current situation of a section of the stream is assessed based on defined data and personal inspection. On the stream, there were provided the measurements by the method of HEM. Capacity of the stream along with the objects for the particular section were calculated in the software HEC-RAS. Based on the results, there have been designed the flood protection. The final design was verified by the calculation in the program HEC-RAS.

The diploma thesis focuses on the assessment of the current state of the Svratka watercourse and of the capacity of the existing objects on the course, which is partially modified in the solved locality and includes both â intravarian and extravarian areas of the town. Within hydrotechnical calculations, the 1D mathematical model HEC-RAS version 5.0.6 was used to determine the course of levels. The thesis focuses also on suitable design of flood protection measures on the river Svratka with protection for design flow Qn = Q20 = 28,6 m3 / s.

This thesis is a study of flood protection in the community Želešice, Brno-venkov. The theoretical part deals with: the causes of flooding, their dividing and deals with options, how to protect endangered area. Main part includes calculations of the amount of sediment in the river Bobrava and the Hajanský stream, analysis of risks by quantitative expression, suggests to complete the flood plan of the community and a list of designed flood control measures with own technical suggestion. The last point is to consider, whether is the community threatened by backwater from the river Svratka, which the river Bobrava flows into.

The main aim of the diploma thesis was an assessment of the current state of the Svratka watercourse flowing largely through the urban area of the town of Jimramov, especially the adjacent parts of Sedliště and Benátky, and to a lesser extent through the suburban area below the municipality. The given section is 2,6 km long with the beginning in the river kilometer 131,10 and the end in the river kilometer 133,70. The capacity of flows and objels in the given period has been assessed (bridges, weirs, steps, etc.). Calculation water surface profiles have been made by usage of the 1D mathematical model HEC-RAS. Part of the work was to determine the current level of flood protection on the stream. The assessment is based on personal visit and photos taken as rekord. The thesis was complemented with hydroecological monitoring of the stream channel – the HEM analysis 2014. The final phase of the work deals with the conceptual design of a nature-friendly flood control measure to increase the protection of the adjacent area and improve the condition of the watercourse. Progress of individual levels and measures are based on hydrotechnical calculations.

En droit financier, la conception des investisseurs protégés apparaît imprécise, alors que le dispositif juridique de protection est composé d’un grand nombre de mesures. Le contraste est saisissant. La première partie de cette recherche souligne la nécessité d’une clarification. Le flou entourant les investisseurs protégés est détaillé et ses conséquences sur l’objectif de protection, d’une part, et sur le dispositif de protection, d’autre part, sont mises en lumière. Plusieurs questions se posent, relatives à la notion d’investisseur comme à la logique et aux critères de protection. Source d’insécurité juridique, une conception indéterminée des investisseurs protégés pèse de différentes manières sur la qualité de la protection. La seconde partie est un essai de clarification qui porte sur la notion juridique d’investisseur, d’une part, et sur la politique juridique de protection, d’autre part. Il est ainsi proposé d’introduire une définition légale de l’investisseur dans le Code monétaire et financier, en s’appuyant sur les notions de sujet de droit et d’acte d’investissement. Une définition juridique de l’acte d’investissement contribue aussi à distinguer la notion juridique d’investisseur, d’un côté, et celles d’actionnaire, de client et de consommateur, de l’autre. La politique de protection envisagée ensuite s’appuie sur des axes connus mais qui gagnent à être réaffirmés et précisés. La pleine mise en oeuvre de cette politique impose alors, compte tenu aussi des catégories redéfinies d’investisseur et d’investisseur qualifié, d’élaborer une nouvelle catégorie juridique d’intervenants sur les marchés financiers. / In financial law, the conception of “protected investors” appears to reveal many uncertainties while at the same time, investor protection measures are numerous. This raises a number of questions. The first part of this research shows that there is a need to clarify this conception. Such a need results mainly from the detailed description of existing uncertainties and their negative consequences on investor protection objective and measures. These difficulties, which are about the concept of investor, the logic of the protection and its criteria, are a source of legal uncertainty. As a result, the quality of the protection is undermined in many different ways. The second part of this research is an attempt to clarify these points. It focuses on the legal concept of investor and on investor protection policy. The idea is to amend the legislative part of the French Monetary and Financial Code to introduce a definition of the word « investor », which relies on the suggestion that an investor should have legal personality and that there should be an act of investment. The legal definition suggested for the concept of “act of investment” also helps to draw distinctions between the legal concept of investor on the one hand, and those of shareholder, client and consumer, on the other hand. The investor protection policy which is then described lies on grounds that may look familiar, but to state them more precisely appears to be useful. For this policy to be fully implemented, and taking into account the definitions or amendments brought to the categories of “investor” and of “qualified investor”, a new legal category of actors in the financial markets needs to be elaborated.

Comme deux éléments qui ne peuvent coexister sans se nuire, les exceptions au droit d’auteur et les mesures techniques de protection sont dans un rapport d’opposition. On ne compte plus dans la littérature spécialisée le nombre d’articles dédiés à leur incompatibilité. Les exceptions au droit d’auteur sont des « dérogations légales » au monopole d’exploitation. Elles permettent d’écarter la mise en oeuvre du droit exclusif alors que les conditions d’application de ce dernier sont réunies. Les mesures techniques de protection sont destinées à empêcher les utilisations interdites par les titulaires de droits. La question est de savoir si ces dispositifs techniques peuvent restreindre l’exercice des exceptions au droit d’auteur. La réponse est positive puisque la directive 2001/29/CE du 22 mai 2001 interdit de contourner des mesures techniques quand bien même il s’agirait de mettre en oeuvre une dérogation au droit d’auteur. Cependant, l’instrument européen instaure un régime de sauvegarde en faveur de certaines exceptions. Aussi, le législateur français a créé une autorité administrative indépendante – la Haute Autorité pour la diffusion des oeuvres et la protection des droits sur Internet – chargée de garantir le bénéfice de ces exceptions. Il est permis de se demander si l’instauration d’un régime de sauvegarde n’est pas la reconnaissance implicite de la valeur impérative des dérogations au droit d’auteur. En tous les cas, cela donne à penser que les exceptions constituent bel et bien des intérêts juridiquement protégés susceptibles d’être portés devant l’autorité judiciaire contrairement à ce qu’a jugé la Cour de cassation. / Like two elements that cannot coexist without working against each other, exceptions to exclusive rights and technological protection measures are in opposition. There are countless articles in the specialised literature devoted to their incompatibility. Exceptions to exclusive rights are “legal exemptions” from the operating monopoly. They enable the implementation of exclusive rights to be neutralised even though the conditions for the application of the latter have been met. Technological protection measures are intended to prevent unauthorised use by rightholders. The question is whether these technological systems can restrict the use of exceptions to exclusive rights. The answer is affirmative, since the directive 2001/29/CE of 22 May 2001 prohibits the circumvention of technological measures even though it would be a case of implementing an exemption to exclusive rights. The European instrument, however, establishes a protection system in favour of certain exceptions. Consequently, French lawmakers have created an independent administrative authority – the High Authority for the dissemination of creative works and protection of rights on the Internet – in order to safeguard the benefits of these exceptions. It could be asked whether the establishment of a protection system implicitly acknowledges the crucial value of these exceptions. In any event, it suggests that they do indeed constitute legally protected interests liable to be brought before the legal authorities, contrary to the Court of Cassation’s assertions.