Die Dissertation beschäftigt sich mit dem Partikularrecht mittelalterlicher Ordensgemeinschaften, wobei im Mittelpunkt der Untersuchung ein struktureller Vergleich der Statuten und Konstitutionen ausgewählter religiöser Orden und Kommunitäten des Hoch- und Spätmittelalters steht. Vom ius commune blieb das Recht der Orden recht unberührt, wobei einer der Gründe - neben der unüberschaubaren Vielfalt - die den Orden vom Papst zugebilligte weitgehende Rechtsautonomie gewesen sein dürfte. Die Orden nutzten diesen Freiraum in extensiver Weise und schufen sich eigene partikulare Rechtstexte. Zu den basalen Normen der hochmittelalterlichen Orden und Gemeinschaften gehören die Regel, sodann consuetudines, Statuten und weitere normative Texte. Es hat jedoch den Anschein, dass für die Zeitgenossen oft keine klaren Unterscheidungsmerkmale zwischen den verschiedenen Bezeichnungen existierten. Der kleinste gemeinsame Nenner der bisherigen Forschung für eine Definition von Statutentexten ist wohl der, dass es sich um schriftliche, im Konsens gesatzte, in die Zukunft wirkende Normen handelt. Die Studie soll diese Auslegung überprüfen und genauer bestimmen. Dabei wird ein möglichst breiter Vergleich der Statutentexte verschiedener mittelalterlicher Orden und Religiosengemeinschaften angestrebt. Hierbei muss freilich auch auf die Eigenheiten und unterschiedlichen Verfassungsstrukturen der Verbände eingegangen werden, um zum einen diejenigen Institutionen zu beschreiben, welche legislative Kompetenzen besaßen und zum anderen zu erörtern, wie stark diese Befugnisse jeweils ausgeprägt waren. Ein weiterer Schritt ist schließlich die vergleichende Untersuchung der Texte selbst sein. Hierbei steht weniger der inhaltliche, sondern vielmehr der strukturelle Vergleich im Vordergrund, um Aussagen zum Typus ‚Statut‘ treffen zu können. Das heißt, dass Aufbau und Anlagemethode der Texte sowie ihr eigentümlicher Duktus beziehungsweise Formulierungsmuster beleuchtet werden. Im Ergebnis zeigen sich vergleichend unterschiedliche Entwicklungen und Strukturmuster auf.

La presente investigación se centra en analizar la relevancia y justificación de implementar la imprescriptibilidad penal en los delitos de colusión y peculado en sus formas más graves. El estudio destaca que estos delitos tienen un impacto significativo en los bienes jurídicos fundamentales de la sociedad, y su prescripción puede limitar la capacidad del sistema de justicia para imponer castigos a los individuos responsables y corregir los perjuicios ocasionados. Asimismo, examina los argumentos que respaldan la adopción de la imprescriptibilidad penal, resaltando la necesidad de proteger los intereses de la humanidad y garantizar la responsabilidad de los culpables a lo largo del tiempo. Por tanto, argumenta a favor de la incorporación normativa de la imprescriptibilidad penal en los delitos de colusión y peculado en sus modalidades agravadas, destacando su importancia para proteger los intereses de la humanidad y garantizar la justicia a largo plazo. En tal sentido, proporciona un análisis detallado de los fundamentos jurídicos y normativos que respaldan esta propuesta, ofreciendo una contribución significativa al debate académico y jurídico en este campo. / The present research focuses on analyzing the relevance and justification of implementing the imprescriptibility of criminal liability in cases of collusion and aggravated embezzlement. The study highlights that these crimes have a significant impact on the fundamental legal interests of society, and their prescription can limit the justice system's ability to hold the responsible parties accountable and repair the inflicted damage. Additionally, it examines the arguments that support the adoption of criminal imprescriptibility, emphasizing the need to protect humanity's interests and ensure the accountability of offenders over time. Therefore, it argues in favor of the normative incorporation of criminal imprescriptibility in cases of collusion and aggravated embezzlement, highlighting its importance in safeguarding humanity's interests and ensuring long-term justice. Accordingly, it provides a detailed analysis of the legal and normative foundations to support this proposal, making a significant contribution to the academic and legal debate in this field.

af / Suid-Afrika is sedert 27 April 1994 'n materiele regstaat, wat deur beide uitdruklike en 'ongeskrewe' fundamentele waardes onderskraag word. Dit is juis hierdie fundamentele waardes wat 'n blote formele konstitusie (as grondslag van 'n relative democracy) van 'n oppermagtige grondwet (as basis van 'n materiele standard-setting democracy) onderskei. Alhoewel daar 'n lewendige debat oor die toepaslikheid van die talle tradisionele grondwetuitlegmetodes gevoer word, is daar nietemin tans geen oorhoofse waardebaseerde paradigma vir grondwetuitleg nie. Soms wil dit voorkom asof fundamentele grondwetlike waardes net as normatiewe retoriek, in stede van materiele riglyn, by grondwetuitleg gebruik word. Die owerheidsgesag is aan hoer normatiewe regsbeginsels gebonde wat grotendeels in die fundamentele regte-akte (as deel van 'n oppermagtige grondwet) vervat is. Die gewaarborgde fundamentele regte dien derhalwe as konkretisering van beide die regstaat en die demokrasie: die materiele regstaatbegrip is die basis van _die grondwetlike staat. Die materiele regstaat, as geregtigheidstaat, kan dus gesien word as die eindbestemming van die grondwet as lex fundamentalis in die regsorde. 'n Oppermagtige grondwet is egter onlosmaaklik verbind aan die materiele regstaat. Daarom behels grondwetuitleg noodwendig die aktivering van die grondwetlik-gepositiveerde waardes. Hierdie normatiewe regsbeginsels en fundamentele waardes wat in die grondwet as grundnorm van die geregtigheidstaat beliggaam is, moet dan deur 'n onafhanklike regbank gehandhaaf en afgedwing word. In beginsel is grondwetuitleg gemoeid met die identifisering, handhawing en aktivering van die fundamentele waardes wat 'n oppermagtige grondwet onderskraag. Waarde-aktiverende grondwetuitleg is nietemin nie 'n bloudruk waarmee aile praktiese uitlegprobleme opgelos kan word nie, maar 'n oorhoofse waardebaseerde paradigma: 'n dwingende, normatiewe verwysingsraamwerk waarvandaan, waarbinne en waarheen grondwetuitleg op pad is. Die tradisionele grondwetuitlegmetodiek is bloat aanvullende tegnieke wat 'n waarde-aktiverende paradigma van grondwetuitleg ondersteun. Aangesien fundamentele waardes onlosmaaklik deel van die materiele regstaat is, moet grondwetuitleg nie net waardebaseer nie, maar ook waardegerig wees; nie net waardes handhaaf nie, maar ook bevorder en aktiveer; nie net waardes weerspieel nie, maar ook aktief vestig. 86 'n raamwerk vir grondwetuitleg behels die 'animering' en konkretisering van fundamentele waardes, ideale en standaarde wat die materiele regstaat onderle, kortom, waarde-aktiverende grondwetuitleg as vergestalting van die materiele regstaat. / On 27 April1994 South Africa became a constitutional state (Rechtsstaat), underpinned by both express, and 'unwritten' fundamental constitutional values. These values represent the distinction between a formal constitution (ie the basis of a relative democracy), and a supreme constitution (the foundation of a material standard-setting democracy). Although the merits of various methods of constitutional interpretation are hotly debated, no general value-based paradigm for constitutional interpretation has yet been established. At times it seems as if fundamental constitutional values are merely invoked as normative rhetoric during constitutional interpretation, rather than as substantive guidelines. Government institutions are bound by these higher normative legal principles, which in a supreme constitution are articulated primarily in the bill of fundamental rights. The guaranteed fundamental rights are a concretisation of both the constitutional state and democracy: the material law state principle (Rechtsstaatprinzip) as the foundation of the constitutional state. The Rechtsstaat as 'just state' is the ultimate goal of a supreme constitution as lex fundamentalis in the legal order. A supreme constitution is inextricably linked to the Rechtsstaat. As a result, constitutional interpretation inevitably involves animating and activating values positivised within the constitution.These normative legal principles and fundamental values must be maintained and enforced by an independent judiciary. In principle, constitutional interpretation deals with the identification, maintenance and animation of the fundamental values underlying a supreme constitution. Value-activating constitutional interpretation is not a blueprint for resolving all practical interpretive problems, but it is a general value-based paradigm: a peremptory, normative frame of reference from which, within which and towards which all constitutional interpretation should be directed. The traditional methodologies of constitutional interpretation are merely ancillary techniques supporting a value-activating paradigm of constitutional interpretation. Since fundamental values undeniably form part of the Rechtsstaat, constitutional interpretation should not only be value-based, but also values-directed; should not merely uphold the values, but also promote and activate them; should not only reflect the values, but also actively establish them. Such a framework for constitutional interpretation involves the animation and concretisation of the fundamental values, standards and ideals underlying the constitutional state: valueactivating constitutional interpretation as embodiment of the Rechtsstaat. / Law / LL.D. (Law)

The Constitution stipulates that its value-commitments are to inform the interpretation of statutes and the development of the common law and customary law. Legislative construction and law-application generally are therefore to be perceived as involving an axiological dimension. Three hermeneutical traditions are dealt with to the end of clarifying the approaches to be adopted in everyday legal• argumentation. The study culminates in the adduction of leads for substantive !juridical argument in the process of statutory interpretation and in handling common-law and customary-law sources. These leads are shown to be functional byi way of a critical discussion of recent case law and a conspectus of contemporary t~ought bearing on the nature of customary law. The social dimension of the legal process is throughout underscored as a factor of significance. Concomitantly, it is rcigistered that the jurisprudence of formalism, so marked an attitude of a previous time, should be abjured to the extent that it is disdainful of value-commitment. Conformably, literalist and literalist-cumintentionalist perceptions as well as kindred stances are berated. The penultimate chapter of this thesis suggests an encompassing approach to the interpretation of statutes, comprised of a systematic tabulation of insights previously garnered. The fmal chapter postulates that common law and customary law are not to be dealt with upon an interchangeable basis, inasmuch as the sources go out from radically divergent premises. It then proceeds to elaborate a conceptual framework for dealing respectively with each of these sources. / Law / LL.D.

The thesis is aimed at the comparison of legal regulations of the private limited company in spanish and czech law, especially because this type of company belongs currently to one of the most wide-spreaded forms of business associations and as such creates the legal framework for the development of small and medium enterpreneurship. The thesis is divided into several thematic parts describing particular features of private limited company. This way I tried to find the most important differences between these two systems of law with the intention of clearing their advantages and also disadvantages.

臺灣之地籍圖，乃係承襲自1903年日治時期所測製完成而以人工方式謄繪的地籍副圖，經國民政府於1945年接收後，由本省各地政事務所延續使用迄今，其齡高達103歲，為我國現今以圖籍記錄人民財產權範圍的唯一原始依據。 / 但日治土地調查規則早於1898年7月的前清時期即已制定，而土地法及其施行法係國民政府在1936年3月訓政時期所令頒施行的產物，兩者法制規範相隔達40年之遙，何以在不同政體下各所依據之法理卻能取得一致？否則臺灣地籍圖依法即無立錐之地。由於歷史承接，混沌不明，以致成為謎樣的年代，相關研究普遍缺乏深入分析，本文為使原貌重現，填補歷史影像，故為論述傾注重心。 / 臺灣省行政長官公署在光復初期，認為：日治時期臺灣省地籍測量與地籍調查之程序與精度符合我國土地法規定，故免予重辦地籍測量，並以局部改正之「修補」方式替代「整理」地籍，一舉完成臺灣土地總登記。 / 事實上，透過我國土地法典分析，雖然日治地籍測量外觀上之「程序」符合土地法第44條之規定，但深入剖視後，其「實體」部分則完全無法見容於我國地籍測量法制規範，縱使1945年5月間存置於臺灣總督府之日治地籍原圖未遭炸燬滅失，仍不能治癒其在法制上之闕失病症。 / 臺灣光復後未及數載，圖籍病態逐漸接踵浮現，已難再掩飾其症，非重新「改測」無以回春。惟臺灣省政府自民國45年度起實施地籍圖修正測量至64年度止之試辦地籍圖重測，在長達二十年間的臺灣圖籍重建工作，竟係處於無法律明文依據之情況下所進行，除明顯未臻妥適之外，更不符「法律保留」原則。 / 迨1975年7月間修正土地法，增訂第46條之1、第46條之2、第46條之3等三個條文，始為臺灣地籍圖重測建構法制根基。但由於立法層面思慮不盡周全，形成重大缺漏，非僅未能有效釐整地籍，反因重測地籍調查指界衍生出更進一步的爭議。諸如：到場指界者顯然逾越至毗鄰未到場之土地所有權支配範圍、抑或毗鄰未登記土地時，剝奪私有地之指界權，但公有土地則自成免疫系統排除法規範約制、甚至限縮各土地共有人依法均得單獨指界之權利及義務、…等多項法制闕失，主管機關仍縱任三十年而未正視，與憲法保障人民財產權意旨似相背違。 / 由於臺灣省猶有高達400萬筆以上之土地，亟待實施地籍圖重測，仍須面對上述各項法律疑義癥結；因此，歸結本研究結果，提出改進方向及相關條文之修法建議，為未來地籍圖重測，尋覓出賡續發展之經營脈絡。 / The Taiwan Cadastral map adopts basically the code of Japanese statutes, which is a manually drawn copy of the cadastral map of a cadastral surveying project completed in 1903 under the Japanese statutes. Since the time it was received by the R.O.C. central government in 1945, it has been used by the various local offices of land administration ever since. It is 103 years old and is now the only original foundation being used as the map document recording the scope of people’s property right. / But the land survey regulations under the Japan statutes was enacted back in July 1898 during the period of the Ching Dynasty, while the land law and its implementation regulation were enacted in March 1936 during the period of political tutelage. There were 40 years between the times of enactment of the two laws, but how could the bases of law principles under different political entities be coinciding? Otherwise, the Taiwan Cadastral map would have no ground to stand. Because of the historical transitions, information and data are indefinite, which was a time of ambiguity. Besides, the related researches are generally lack of in-depth analyses. In order to reappear the original look and to supplement historical images, this writing places great emphases on the studies. / In the early stage of the retrocession, the administrative chief office of Taiwan province deemed that the procedure and accuracy of the Taiwan cadastral survey and cadastral investigation under the Japan statutes were in compliance with the regulations of our country’s land law. Therefore, a second cadastral survey was not needed, and took the way of partial “supplement” instead of “overhaul” of the land file, thus the general Taiwan land registration was completed with a single blow. / In fact, through an analysis of land law of this country, though the “procedure” of cadastral survey under the Japan statutes is in compliance with the regulation of article 44 of the land law; when it is paid an important examination, its “entity” is completely unacceptable to the regulations of our cadastral survey law. Although the original cadastral map of the Japan statutes placed in the Taiwan Viceroy office did not destroyed or damaged by the bombing in May 1945. it would not cure the diseases of the legal system. / In a few years after the Taiwan retrocession, the flaws of the land file began to emerge. It is impossible to cover any more the defects, and the only way to get its healthy condition back was a new “corrective survey.” However, the Taiwan Provincial Government implemented a trial new cadastral survey from 1956 to 1975 for a corrective survey. During the 20-year long Taiwan cadastral reconstruction operations, it was inappropriately conducted under a condition without a legal written basis, which is obviously improper and let alone the principle of “Gesetzesvorbehalt.” / It was not until July 1975 when the Land Law was amended with the addition of Article 46.1, Article 46.2, and Article 46.3, the reconstruction of Taiwan Cadastral map was established. Nevertheless, the considerable flaws were resulted due to the incomplete planning and research in the legislate area beforehand. Not only the operations of survey and reconstruction were not effectively performed, but also more controversial issues were produced. For instance, the present landmark indicator obviously goes beyond the boundary to the neighbor land ownership control scope of the absent one; or to deprive the landmark indicating right of private property while the neighbor scope is not property registered. On the contrary, the public property with what is called immune system, is free of the legal constraint of regulations and rules, and further to limit or minimize the legal rights and obligations of single landmark indicating of joint tenants, etc. Such numerous lawful defects are intentionally ignored by the responsible authorities for as long as thirty years, which is apparently against the purpose of protect the people’s property right of the Constitution. / There are more than 400 million land cases in Taiwan demanding a second cadastral survey, with the objective to resolve the above-mentioned crucial problems. To summarize the research result, a correct direction for future development and improvement, as well as some suggestions for amendment of related articles and clauses are consequently presented, with the objective to perform continuous advancement and operation of prospective cadastral survey.

Cette étude est consacrée au droit privé fédéral et à l'interaction entre la législation fédérale et le droit privé des provinces. Elle porte plus précisément sur le rôle des tribunaux dans le cadre de cette interaction. Elle a pour objectif de vérifier comment les juges procèdent à l'unification du droit privé fédéral en évitant de recourir formellement au droit provincial à titre supplétif. Dans un premier temps, elle établit le cadre juridique gouvernant l'interprétation du droit privé fédéral, de même que l'exercice du pouvoir judiciaire dans ce contexte. Dans un deuxième temps, elle analyse à travers un ensemble de jugements les procédés employés par les juges pour réaliser l'unification du droit privé fédéral. Elle conclut que ces procédés peuvent effectivement permettre de réaliser, au plan pratique, une telle unification. Cependant, ces interventions judiciaires sont ponctuelles et sont limitées à certains aspects de la conception ou de l'application des normes de droit privé. Dans les cas plus problématiques, elles peuvent avoir pour effet soit de nier le vide normatif rendant nécessaire le recours aux sources supplétives provinciales, soit de nier la pluralité formelle de ces sources dans le contexte fédéral. / This study is devoted to federal private law and the interaction between federal legislation and provincial private law. In particular, it is devoted to the role of the courts in such interaction. Hs objective is to assess how judges proceed with the unification of federal private law by avoiding formal reference to provincial law to supplement federal legislation. Firstly, the study considers the legal framework governing the interpretation of federal private law, as well as the exercise of judicial power in this context. Secondly, the study reviews means employed by judges, through a series of judgments, to proceed with the unification of federal private law. The study concludes that unification can effectively be achieved through such means. However, these judicial interventions are limited to sorne aspects of the elaboration and application ofprivate norms. In more complex cases, the effect of these interventions may be to disregard normative gaps that make necessary to supplement federal legislation with sources of provincial law, or to deny the plurality of these sources in the federal context. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de maîtrise en droit". Ce mémoire a été accepté à l'unanimité et classé parmi les 5% des mémoires de la discipline. Commentaires du jury : "Remarquable par le choix du sujet et son traitement tant pour la forme que le fond. Mérite publication".

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.