Spelling suggestions: "subject:"dermination clause"" "subject:"determination clause""
1 |
L’aménagement de la force majeure dans le contrat : essai de théorie générale sur les clauses de force majeure dans les contrats internes et internationaux de longue durée / The layout of force majeure in contracts : essay on the general theory of force majeure clauses in domestic and international long-term contractsIbara, Rochfelaire 03 July 2012 (has links)
La stipulation des clauses de force majeure dans les contrats internes et internationaux de longue durée procède de la liberté contractuelle et doit sa raison d'être dans la répulsivité des normes supplétives d'allocation des risques. La reconnaissance de leur licéité reste incertaine en raison des difficultés d'identification de leur technique et de leur nature juridique que la doctrine assimile à la quadrature du cercle en géométrie.Compte tenu de l'impact de l'aléa sur l'existence de l'objet et la valeur de l'obligation de garantie qui constitue l'essence des clauses de force majeure, une summa divisio peut être fondamentalement esquissée entre les clauses d'appréciation et d'attribution des risques de force majeure. Les unes sont assujetties à un aléa juridique et relèvent du régime des actes juridiques aléatoires. Les autres sont affectées par un aléa économique et procèdent du régime des actes juridiques commutatifs même si la jurisprudence les rattache indûment au régime des clauses de responsabilité.De lege ferenda, la rationalisation du régime des clauses de force majeure nécessite la codification du raisonnable en tant que principe directeur du droit interne des contrats afin d'entreprendre leur summa divisio en soumettant distributivement les clauses d'appréciation des risques au test qualitatif du raisonnable de conformité et les clauses d'attribution des risques au test quantitatif du raisonnable de modulation / The statement of force majeure provisions in long-term internal and international contracts is based on the ground of the freedom of contract and promoted by the inefficiency of suppletive risk allocation norms in modern legal systems. The recognition of their enforceability still subject to uncertainty due to the misunderstanding of their drafting and their judicial construction that is commonly said to amount to squaring the circle. Base on the influence of the uncertainty conditioning the subject-matter and the value of the obligation to guarantee underlying force majeure clauses, a fundamental summa divisio is drawn up between risk assessment and risk attribution agreements. The first clauses are subject to the uncertainty of a legal nature and should follow the random legal acts framework. The second are affected by the uncertainty of economic nature and should depend to the commutative legal acts framework even though force majeure clauses are unduly treated in case law as exclusion clauses. De lege ferenda, the force majeure clauses regime is expected to be rationalized with the integration of the reasonable reasoning as a fundamental guiding principal of French contract law so that to implement the summa divisio of force majeure agreements by adjusting distributively the risk assessment clauses unreason through the reasonable compliance test and the risk attribution clauses abuses through the reasonable modulation test
|
2 |
A critical analysis of the removal of directors by the board of directors and the judiciary under the Companies Act 71 of 2008Cassim, Rehana 04 1900 (has links)
Section 71(3) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 has introduced into South African company
law a provision which for the first time permits the board of directors to remove another director
from office in certain specific instances. A further significant innovation in the Companies Act
71 of 2008 is contained in section 162, which empowers a court to make an order declaring a
director delinquent or placing him under probation in specific instances. The effect of section
162 is that a court is empowered to remove a director from the board of directors. The focus of
this thesis is the removal of directors from office by the board of directors and by the judiciary.
The thesis explores the underpinning philosophy of the statutory provisions relating to the
removal of directors from office. It also examines the impact of the power given to the board
of directors and to the courts to remove a director from office. The grounds and the procedures
for the removal of directors by the board of directors and the judiciary are examined. The
fiduciary duties applicable to directors in removing a director from the board of directors are
also explored. In addition, this thesis examines the removal of directors holding multiple
positions or capacities in relation to a company, such as an employee or a shareholder with
loaded voting rights. The remedies which may be relied on by a director who has been removed
from office by the board of directors are examined. Recommendations are made to strengthen
and improve the provisions in the Companies Act 71 of 2008 relating to the removal of directors
from office by the board of directors and the judiciary. Amendments to the Companies Act 71
of 2008 are suggested to remove ambiguities; to guard against the abuse of sections 71(3) and
162; to improve the grounds and procedures for the removal of directors by the board of
directors and the judiciary, and to enhance the remedies that may be relied on by a director who
has been removed from office by the board of directors. / Artikel 71(3) van die Maatskappywet 71 van 2008 het ’n bepaling tot Suid-Afrikaanse
maatskappyreg toegevoeg wat die direksie vir die eerste keer in staat stel om ’n ander direkteur
in sekere spesifieke gevalle uit sy of haar amp te verwyder. ’n Verdere belangrike vernuwing
in die Maatskappywet 71 van 2008 word in artikel 162 vervat, wat ’n hof magtig om ’n bevel
uit te vaardig wat ’n direkteur misdadig verklaar of hom of haar in spesifieke gevalle aan ’n
proeftydperk onderwerp. Die effek van artikel 162 is dat ’n hof by magte is om ’n direkteur
uit die direksie te verwyder. Die fokus van hierdie tesis is die verwydering van direkteure uit
hul ampte deur die direksie en die regbank. Die tesis verken die onderliggende filosofie van
die statutêre bepalings wat met die verwydering van direkteure uit hul ampte verband hou. Dit
ondersoek ook die impak van die bevoegdheid wat aan die direksie en die howe verleen word
om ’n direkteur uit sy of haar amp te verwyder. Die gronde en prosedures vir die verwydering
van direkteure deur die direksie en die regbank word ondersoek. Die fidusiêre pligte van
toepassing op direkteure by die verwydering van ’n direkteur uit die direksie word ook verken.
Daarbenewens ondersoek hierdie tesis die verwydering van direkteure wat veelvuldige posisies
of hoedanighede met betrekking tot ’n maatskappy beklee, soos ʼn werknemer of aandeelhouer
met gelaaide stemregte. Die regsmiddele waarop ’n direkteur, wat deur die direksie uit sy of
haar amp verwyder is, kan steun, word ondersoek. Aanbevelings word gemaak om die
bepalings in die Maatskappywet 71 van 2008, wat met die verwydering van direkteure uit hul
ampte deur die direksie en regbank verband hou, te versterk en te verbeter. Wysigings aan die
Maatskappywet 71 van 2008 word voorgestel om dubbelsinnighede uit te skakel; om teen die
misbruik van artikels 71(3) en 162 te waak; om die gronde en prosedures vir die verwydering
van direkteure deur die direksie en die regbank te verbeter, en om die regsmiddele waarop ’n
direkteur wat deur die direksie uit sy of haar amp verwyder is kan steun, te versterk. / ISigaba 71(3) Somthetho weZinkampani 71 ka 2008 sewuze wangenisa emithethweni
yezinkampani zaseNingizimu Afrika, umthetho ongowokuqala ovumela ibhodi labaqondisi
ukuthi libe namandla wokugudluza omunye umqondisi esikhundleni sakhe ngaphansi kwezimo
ezithile. Olunye ushintsho olusha kuMthetho wama-71 weZinkampani ka 2008 uqukethwe
yiSigaba 162, wona ugunyaza inkantolo ukuthi ikhiphe umyalelo owazisa umqondisi ngokuthi
unecala noma obeka umqondisi ngaphansi kophenyo, phecelezi “probation” ngesinye
isikhathi. Inhloso yeSigaba 162 wukunikeza inkantolo igunya lokugudluza umqondisi
kwibhodi labaqondisi. Impokophelo yale thisisi wukugudluzwa kwabaqondisi, bagudluzwe
yibhodi labaqondisi kanye nomthetho/nobulungisa. Ithisisi ihlola ifilosofi yemithetho
ekhishiwe emayelana nokugudluzwa kwabaqondisi ezikhundleni zabo, Kanti futhi ihlola
umthelela wamandla anikezwe ibhodi labaqondisi kanye nezinkantolo ukuthi zigudluze
umqondisi esikhundleni. Izizathu kanye nengqubo elandelwayo mayelana nokugudluzwa
kwabaqondisi yibhodi labaqondisi kanye nomthetho nazo ziyahlolwa. Imisebenzi emayelana
nokuthembeka eyenziwa ngabaqondisi ukugudluza umqondisi kwibhodi labaqondisi nayo
iyacwaningwa Ngaphezu kwalokhu, le thisisi .iphenya ukugudluzwa kwabaqondisi abaqokwe
ezikhundleni eziningi noma abanegunya elithize ngokwengqubo yenkampani,
enjengesisebenzi, phecelezi “employee” noma umabelwa-mashezi onamalungelo amaningi
okuvota, phecelezi, “loaded with voting rights”. Izeluleko ezingasetshenziswa wumqondisi
ogudluzwe esikhundleni sakhe yibhodi labaqondisi nazo ziyahlolwa. Izincomo nazo ziyenziwa
ngenhloso yokuqinisa kanye nokuthuthukiswa kwamandla oMthetho we-71 weZinkampani ka
2008, mayelana nokugudluzwa kwabaqondisi ezikhundleni yibhodi labaqondisi kanye
nomthetho. Izinguquko zoMthetho wama-71 weZinkampani ka 2008 ziqonde ukususa
izixakaxaka, ukulwa nokudlelezelwa kweSigaba 71(3) kanye no 162, ukuthuthukisa izizathu
kanye nezingqubo zokugudluzwa kwabaqondisi yibhodi labaqondisi kanye nomthetho,
ukuqinisa izindlela zokulungisa ezingasetshenziswa wumqondisi osegudluziwe esikhundleni
yibhodi labaqondisi. / Mercantile Law / LL. D.
|
Page generated in 0.1072 seconds