[pt] Violência urbana e omissões estatais: da irresponsabilidade à responsabilidade – uma análise das transformações da responsabilidade civil do Estado à luz da teoria dos Direitos Fundamentais investiga os rumos da responsabilidade civil do Estado – sobretudo na modalidade omissiva –, conectando o problema à questão da violência urbana. Embora a responsabilidade civil do Estado (independentemente de culpa) já faça parte da tradição constitucional brasileira há décadas, são raras as indagações teóricas – bem assim as decisões judiciais – que responsabilizam civilmente o Estado pelos danos sofridos pelos cidadãos resultantes da violência urbana (podemos dizer que embora a responsabilidade civil objetiva do Estado faça parte da tradição constitucional brasileira há muitas décadas, as consequências interpretativas ainda não foram adequadamente desenvolvidas). A tese, nesse contexto, analisa criticamente a jurisprudência brasileira relativa ao problema, apontando falhas de coerência e possível ausência de consistência teórica do padrão mental convencional a respeito do tema. A violência urbana, hoje, embora constitucionalmente conectada às funções estatais (ninguém põe em dúvida que o dever de prestar segurança pública é um dever do Estado), é um território de ninguém, no que diz respeito à assunção – jurídica – dos riscos, particularmente no que se refere à responsabilidade civil do Estado. A pesquisa questiona se há, nestas primeiras décadas do século XXI, uma rede de conexões normativas e conceituais que permitam repensar o problema (convém lembrar que há, nas sociedades contemporâneas, uma constante reavaliação dos riscos que são socialmente aceitáveis, bem como há uma dinâmica reavaliação de quem são os responsáveis por eles). Busca-se, por fim, a construção de um modelo teórico para a responsabilização estatal por omissão nos casos de violência urbana, a partir das categorias conceituais da responsabilidade objetiva agravada e do fortuito interno. / [en] Urban violence and State omissions: from irresponsibility to responsibility - an analysis of State liability s transformations under the Fundamental Rights theory investigates the courses of State liability, especially in the omission way, connecting the problem to urban violence issue. Although State liability (regardless of guilt) has already been part of the Brazilian constitutional tradition for decades, there are scarce theoretical inquiries - as well as judicial decisions - that make the State civilly liable for the damages suffered by citizens resulting from urban violence (we can say that although State strict liability has been part of the Brazilian constitutional tradition for many decades, the interpretative consequences have not yet been adequately developed). The thesis, in this context, critically analyzes the Brazilian jurisprudence about the problem, pointing out flaws of coherence and possible lack of theoretical consistency of conventional mental standard about the subject. Today, the urban violence, although constitutionally connected to state functions (no one doubts that the duty to provide public security is a state duty), is a no one territory, in regard to juridical assumption of risks, particularly in what concern State liability. The research questions the existence of a network of normative and conceptual connections that allow us to rethink the problem in these first 21st century decades (we must remember that, in contemporary societies, there is a constant reassessment about the risks that are socially acceptable, as well as dynamic reassessment about who are responsible for them). Finally, we aim to construct a theoretical model for State liability by omission in urban violence cases, based on conceptual categories of aggravated strict liability and internal fortuitous event.

EB teisės aktų tiesioginio ir netiesioginio veikimo principo taikymo trūkumai, ypač Direktyvų įgyvendinimo kontekste, peržvelgiant praktiką, leido ETT išvystyti trečiąjį ir atskirą principą Francovich byloje - valstybės atsakomybės principą. Teismas laikė, kad jei valstybė nepajėgė įgyvendinti Europos Bendrijos Direktyvos, tai ji privalo asmeniui atlyginti žalą, jei jie nukentėjo dėl valstybės nesugebėjimo įgyvendinti Direktyvos ir jei yra tenkinamos atitinkamos sąlygos. Tai yra, kur: • Direktyva apibrėžia teises, suteiktas asmenims, • tų teisių turinys Direktyvoje turi būti aiškiai apibrėžtas, ir • turi būti priežastinis ryšys tarp valstybės padaryto pažeidimo ir asmenų patirtos žalos. Teismo aiškinimas buvo pagrįstas valstybių narių įsipareigojimu įgyvendinti Direktyvas pagal EB Sutarties 249 str. (ex 189) ir bendrą įsipareigojimą pagal EB Sutarties 10 str. (ex 5) „imtis visų reikiamų priemonių..., kad garantuotų vykdymą“ įsipareigojimų pagal Bendrijos teisę. Klausimai kurie buvo nagrinėjami Teismo nagrinėjant Braserie/Factortame bylas: a) valstybės atsakomybės principas neturi būti apribotas nepasisekimu įgyvendinti Europos Bendrijos Direktyvas: turi būti įtraukti ir kiti Bendrijos teisės pažeidimai, apimant nesėkmes ir įgyvendinant normas b) Žalos atlyginimas, pagal Francovich sampratą, turi būti įmanomas-efektyvus, nepriklausomai nuo priemonių, pagal kurias Bendrijos teisės galėtų būti užtikrintos, tai yra viena iš tiesioginio ar netiesioginio veikimo principo sąlygų. c)... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The shortcomings of the principles of direct and indirect effects, particularly in the context of enforcement of Directives, as outlined above, led the Court to develope a third and separate principe in Francovich, the principe of State liability. The Court held that where, as here, a State had failed to implement an EC Directive it would be obliged to compensate individuals for damage suffered as a result of its failure to implement the Directive if certain conditions were satisfied. That is, where: • The directive involved rights confered on individuals, • The content of those rights could be identified on the basis of the provisions of the Directive, and • There was a causal link between the State`s failure and the damage suffered by the persons affected. The Court`s reasoning was based on member States obligations to implement Directives under Article 249 (ex 189) and their general obligation under Article 10 (ex 5) of the EC Treaty to „take all appropriate measures... to ensure fulfilment of“ their obligations under Community law. Questions were refered to Court of Justice for interpretation in Braserie/Factortame: a) the principe of State liability should not be confined to failure to implement EC Directives: it should attach to other failures to comply with Community law, including legislatives failures. b) A remedy under Francovich should be available whether or not there were other means by which Community rights might be enforced, that is, on the principles of... [to full text]

La participation de personnes privées à des opérations militaires n’est pas récente et s’est longtemps illustrée par le phénomène des mercenaires, mais elle a pris beaucoup d’ampleur depuis les années 1990 et le recours à des sociétés militaires privées. Ces sociétés se voient confier des tâches qui ne sont pas directement liées au cœur de métier des armées étatiques, mais certaines d’entre elles peuvent concerner des prestations armées. Le recours à des personnes privées dans le cadre d’opérations militaires soulève de nombreuses difficultés juridiques. Il est en effet essentiel de déterminer le droit qui est applicable à ces personnes, qu’elles soient qualifiées de mercenaires ou qu’il s’agisse d’employés de sociétés militaires privées. La définition de leur statut est quant à elle fondamentale afin d’examiner la possibilité de retenir leur responsabilité en cas de nécessité. La question de la responsabilité des sociétés militaires privées elles-mêmes est également posée, tout comme celle, primordiale, de la responsabilité des États qui emploient de telles sociétés. / Private persons whether individuals or legal entities have always taken part in military operations and the best and most famous example was the one of mercenaries. But, since the 1990’s, this participation has been renewed by the increasing activity of the private military companies. These companies have contracts for various tasks and some of them are directly linked to armed missions. The participation of private entities in military operations raises a lot of legal questions. It is necessary to as certain the law which will apply to them, whether they are mercenaries or employees of private military companies. The definition of their status is also crucial in order to determine the liability for their acts. Several fundamental questions arise not only as far the liability of these companies is concerned but also, and perhaps even more, as far as the liability of States employing these companies is concerned.

<p>The thesis firstly looks at how women&rsquo / s right to freedom from violence has developed in international (global) human rights law since the early 1990s. In this regard, the study finds that while the issue of violence against women (and women&rsquo / s rights generally) was barely on the international human rights agenda at the beginning of this period, an enormous degree of development has subsequently taken place. Through the adoption of documents such as General Recommendation No. 19 by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Declaration on Elimination of Violence against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action, international norms and standards were set regarding role of the State in providing women with protection against violence.</p>

Pagrindinė kliūtis taikyti valstybei civilinę atsakomybę ilgą laiką buvo valstybės imuniteto (arba suvereno imuniteto, arba įstatymų leidėjo imuniteto) doktrina, kuri neleidžia taikyti valstybei deliktinės atsakomybės už viešojoje srityje atliktus veiksmus. Šis principas kildinamas iš anglų karalių teisės. Šiandien imuniteto egzistavimą bandoma teisinti valstybės turto apsaugos svarba, siekiu užtikrinti valdžių padalijimo principo veikimą, institucijos, turinčios kompetenciją nagrinėti bylas prieš valstybę (ar įstatymų leidėją), nebuvimu, adekvačių teisių gynimo būdų egzistavimu, išrinktų valdžios atstovų pozicijos stiprinimu bei tradicija. Viduramžiška imuniteto doktrina yra nesuderinama demokratinių valstybių principais, tad turi būti visiškai pašalinta. Lietuvos Teismų praktika šios doktrinos egzistavimo Lietuvoje nepripažįsta. Įstatymų leidėju paprastai laikomas subjektas, kuriam suteikta galia pareikšti galutinę ir neginčijamą valią dėl įstatymo priėmimo. Lietuvoje įstatymų leidėju laikomas Parlamentas bei Tauta. Įstatymų leidėjo kompetenciją ir diskreciją riboja Konstitucijoje nustatyti bei prisiimti tarptautiniai įsipareigojimai. Tarptautinių sutarčių pagrindu, pavyzdžiui, EŽTK, Lietuva yra įsipareigojusi užtikrinti pagrindines teises asmenims, esantiems jos jurisdikcijoje. Įstatymas, pažeidžiantis tokią tarptautinę sutartį, laikytinas neteisėtu, tačiau nacionalinė teisė jokiai institucijai nėra suteikusi kompetencijos tikrinti įstatymų atitikimą tarptautinėms... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / A main let to apply tort liability to the state is the principle of sovereign immunity (or state immunity; or legislator immunity), derived from Medieval English law, which says that government is immune from tort liability. Today remains of sovereign immunity doctrine usually is justified by: the importance of protecting government treasuries; separation of powers; the absence of authority for suits against the government; the existence of adequate alternative remedies; strengthening the position of elected politicians; and tradition. The doctrine of immunity is inconsistent with the main principles, recognized by democratic countries, so has no place in democracy and should be repealed entirely. The legislator is a subject, who has a right to make a final and unchallenged decision in the law making process. In Lithuania there are two legislators: the Parliament (Seimas) and the Nation. Competence and discretionary powers of legislature are limited by the Constitution and obligations of the state under the international and European Community law. By international contracts, such as European Convention of Human rights, Lithuania is obliged to confer the main rights to individuals in its jurisdiction. The national law that violates such provisions must be held unlawful, but there are no national institutions that have a competence to state that violation. Individuals may get remedy only if the European Court of Human Rights states the violation; in the same judgment the Court... [to full text]

<p>The thesis firstly looks at how women&rsquo / s right to freedom from violence has developed in international (global) human rights law since the early 1990s. In this regard, the study finds that while the issue of violence against women (and women&rsquo / s rights generally) was barely on the international human rights agenda at the beginning of this period, an enormous degree of development has subsequently taken place. Through the adoption of documents such as General Recommendation No. 19 by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Declaration on Elimination of Violence against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action, international norms and standards were set regarding role of the State in providing women with protection against violence.</p>

Doctor Legum - LLD / The thesis firstly looks at how women's right to freedom from violence has developed in international (global) human rights law since the early 1990s. In this regard, the study finds that while the issue of violence against women (and women's rights generally) was barely on the international human rights agenda at the beginning of this period, an enormous degree of development has subsequently taken place. Through the adoption of documents such as General Recommendation No. 19 by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Declaration on Elimination of Violence against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action, international norms and standards were set regarding role of the State in providing women with protection against violence. / South Africa

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:27:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Renzo Gama Soares.pdf: 711346 bytes, checksum: facf3483b7543905f15fd5e5726fd4db (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-06-24 / Strict liability, the one that doesn t need a negligent act to impose the damage doer the obligation to pay the victim for the damages caused, is getting more and more important in the judiciary system, since the end of he 19th century. Especially after the Civil Code of 2002, the analysis of this kind of torts became even more relevant for the Brazilian Law system because of the several cases in which it is applied, including especially the adoption of this system as a general clause statement. Because of this necessity, the present work intends to study the strict liability, especially concerning its axiological foundations, that for long are beyond the original idea of risk, and some microsystems where this kind of liability is applied. To accomplish this result, the paper was divided in two parts: the first one is used to study the fundaments of torts, since the private vengeance until the strict liability as we know nowadays; the second part is about some of the Microsystems that are not based on a negligent act to impose the damage doer the obligation to pay the victim for the damages caused in the Brazilian legal system. The study is done, as much as possible, in a comparative form with other foreign legislation. Some of them influenced the Brazilian legislator on the text of the 2002 Civil Code, but others just have a similar regulation on the matter, even if there is not any influence on Brazilian Civil Code. These comparative studies are done, as much as possible, based on foreign books that study local statutes, so we tried to avoid an interpretation of foreign legislation out of the country s cultural and social context / A responsabilidade civil objetiva, aquela que prescinde da culpa para sua análise e conseqüente imputação de obrigação de indenizar ao causador do dano, vem ganhando cada vez mais espaço no mundo jurídico, desde o final do século XIX. Especialmente com o advento do Código Civil de 2002, a análise desta espécie de responsabilidade passou a ser ainda mais relevante para o Direito brasileiro, em razão das inúmeras previsões deste tipo de responsabilização neste corpo legislativo, inclusive e especialmente com a adoção deste sistema por meio de uma cláusula geral. Em razão desta necessidade, o presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar a responsabilidade civil objetiva, especialmente no tocante aos seus fundamentos axiológicos, que ultrapassam a originária hipótese de risco, e alguns microssistemas jurídicos em que tal espécie de responsabilidade é aplicada. Para tanto o trabalho foi dividido em duas partes: a primeira cuida da análise dos fundamentos da responsabilidade civil, desde a vingança privada até a responsabilidade objetiva dos tempos atuais; a segunda parte diz respeito especificamente a alguns microssistemas jurídicos que dispensam a culpa para a imputação civil dos danos no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro. A análise, sempre que possível, é feita de forma comparativa com outros ordenamentos jurídicos que influenciaram o legislador de 2002, ou apenas possuem regramento parecido, mesmo que não haja uma relação de influência na legislação brasileira. Tais análises comparadas são feitas, sempre que possível, com base em doutrinas estrangeiras que analisam os textos legais dos respectivos países, de forma a se evitar interpretação do texto legal estrangeiro fora do contexto cultural e social daquele país

In this article the authors highlight the promotion of private sector participation in infrastructure development for the provision of public services, through joint actiondesigned for the private and public sector instruments. Under that context, they take asa starting point the figure of corporate governance, as an efficient state action, because itinvolves a change in the conception of the state and non-state roles in investment in publicservices, considering the actors public and private, as a cooperating conjunction with theformulation and implementation of public policies.In this context, the authors develop and analyze pending tasks in the exercise of regulatoryauthority and its relation to the patrimonial liability of the State, which in their view must also be taken into account for the effectiveness of corporate governance. / En el presente artículo, se destaca el fomento de la participación del sector privado en el desarrollo de infraestructura para la prestación de servicios públicos, a través de instrumentos ideados para una actuación conjunta de los sectores privado y público. Bajo ese contexto, toman como punto de partida a la gobernanza corporativa como una actuación eficiente del Estado, en tanto implica una variación de la concepción de los roles estatales y no estatales en materia de inversión en la prestación de servicios públicos, considerando a los actores públicos y privados como una conjunción cooperante con la formulación y la ejecución de políticas públicas.En ese contexto, los autores desarrollan y analizan tareas pendientes en materia del ejercicio de la potestad reguladora y su relación con la responsabilidad patrimonial del Estado que, desde su perspectiva, deben también tenerse en cuenta para la efectividad de la gobernanza corporativa.

En arbitrage international comme dans la majorité des systèmes de droit, la réparation du dommage est une question essentielle dans la résolution des litiges et implique la détermination d’un dommage réparable et de l’étendue de la réparation, ainsi que l’évaluation de ce dommage. L’arbitrage d’investissement, qui tranche les litiges entre Etats et investisseurs étrangers, personnes privées, est au carrefour entre les droits nationaux et le droit international, entre responsabilité contractuelle et responsabilité internationale des Etats, entre droit commercial et droit public, et reflète ainsi l’ensemble des problématiques récurrentes soulevées par la réparation du dommage. La publicité fréquente des sentences rendues en la matière permet d’analyser les solutions qu’y apportent les tribunaux arbitraux, révélant l’existence d’une réelle pratique cohérente et développée. L’étude de la jurisprudence arbitrale d’investissement montre une coexistence de questions de fait et de droit, de problématiques juridiques et économiques, tout au long du processus de détermination du dommage et de l’étendue de la réparation, puis de celui de la détermination du montant accordé à la victime. Les exigences juridiques de certitude, prévisibilité et causalité du dommage, de même que les principes de réparation intégrale et adéquate, sont influencés de manière significative par des considérations économiques et d’équité. Dans le mouvement inverse, les règles financières qui sont appliquées par les arbitres pour l’évaluation du dommage, indépendamment du droit applicable, sont de plus en plus juridicisées. Identifier ce corps de règles applicables à la réparation du dommage et l’application qui en est faite dans l’arbitrage d’investissement constitue une clarification nécessaire pour permettre aux acteurs internationaux de connaître l’étendue de leurs droits et obligations. / In international arbitration, as in most legal systems, compensation of damage is a key part of dispute resolution. It is a threefold process: the arbitral tribunal decides on compensable damage, then on the extent of compensation, and finally, evaluates damage. Investment arbitration, which settles disputes between states and foreign investors - private entities - is at the crossroads between national and international law, between contractual liability and international state liability, between commercial and public law, thus covering the wide scope of issues raised by compensation of damage. The awards given in this field are often made public, allowing for an analysis of the – thoroughly consistent – solutions brought forward by arbitral tribunals. This study shows how, throughout the process of compensation of damage, questions of fact and law as well as legal and economic issues are raised. The legal requirements of certainty, foreseeability and remoteness of damage are significantly impacted by the economic context and by the notion of fairness. Conversely, the financial rules applied throughout the process of damage evaluation, without taking into account applicable law, are increasingly governed by law. Identifying the corpus of rules that are applied throughout the process of compensation of damage, and studying the way these rules are applied in investment arbitration therefore represents a useful tool for international bodies seeking to understand their own rights and duties.