The article is meant to delve further "Taiyishengshui". In the discussion text main concept - "Tai-yi", "to give birth to", "the water"... Center does meaning contain why in "Taiyishengshui"?

The focus of this thesis was to use serious games as a tool to teach about obligation to give notice. Obligation to give notice means that certain professionals need to report to social services if a child is being harmed. This thesis studied if case-based storytelling could bring a relevant teaching experience, if storytelling could help participants learn about obligation to give notice and how instant and delayed feedback affect the learning. Participants played a story-based game with either instant or delayed feedback and answered three questionnaires about obligation to give notice. The study found that participants did find that the storytelling was useful for learning and gaining more knowledge about about obligation to give notice. For the feedback it was found that both types of feedback made the participants learn significantly more but there was no significant difference when comparing the feedbacks to each other.

At present and in this country, the concept of spiritual support, pastoral support, or spiritual rehabilitation of the sick is not entirely clear, both in terms of the content and form. Despite this vagueness, spiritual support of the sick forms an inseparable part of so-called holistic, i.e., comprehensive approach to care for human beings. In any case, this type of care is not linked to any religious denomination; rather, we have to understand it as assistance in the area of finding one{\crq}s way (orientation) in the sense of valuating one{\crq}s reality. Namely, patients often seek a spiritual person, be it s professional or layman, who specializes in spiritual rehabilitation. Even patients who claim to be atheist or agnostic need to discuss problems of existential or philosophical nature, which they are unable to find the answer for by themselves. Sometimes, they wish to address issues that had been hidden, while they were enjoying good health, as supposedly "superfluous issues", but due to their sickness, they came to the surface and the patients are short of answers and unable to deal with them. The Master{\crq}s Thesis is divided into two parts: The first, theoretical part focuses on forms and solutions of spiritual rehabilitation, whereas the second part contains statistical comparisons of approaches, opinions, and attitudes on these issues on the part of medical personnel working in hospices and other facilities. In this Thesis, the above can be summed up into three basic factors: 1) Pastoral medicine offered as one of the options for those who are gravely ill or dying and seek "spiritual rehabilitation" and fulfillment of their spiritual desires; 2) Facilitation of access to information on the interaction of medical fields of specialty and psychology with spiritual guidance; 3) Documentation of the spectrum of opinions and experience that individual medical workers have about spiritual rehabilitation.

Syftet: Syftet med studien är att beskriva och utveckla förståelse för hur HR-personal hanterar destruktiva konflikter mellan personer på arbetsplatser. Fokus är på de utmaningar HR-personal upplever i konflikthanteringsprocessen. Metod: Studien har utförts genom en kvalitativ studie med en induktiv forskningsansats. Studien har tillämpat en undersökningsdesign likt en tvärsnittsstudie och datainsamlingen har skett genom ostrukturerade intervjuer. Slutsats: Studiens resultat visar att HR har ett antal utmaningar i sitt arbete för att hantera destruktiva konflikter på arbetsplatsen. HRs hanteringsprocess behöver vara situationsanpassad, därigenom använder HR olika tillvägagångssätt i sitt hanteringsarbete där HR-kollegors stöd beskrivs vara väsentligt. Vi konstaterar att många av utmaningarna grundar sig i att HRs arbete kopplat till konflikthantering handlar om människor. Komplexitet finns i att HR kommer in sent i processen, att hanteringen beror på mottagandet samt att det är svårt att veta vilka avväganden som krävs. Det påvisas däremot vara ytterst relevant att faktiskt hantera konflikten. / Purpose: The purpose of this study is to describe and develop an understanding of how HR-personnel handle destructive conflicts between people in workplaces. The focus is on the challenges HR-personnel experience in the conflict management process. Method: The study is conducted through a qualitative study with an inductive research approach. The study applied a survey design similar to a cross-sectional study and the data collection was carried out through unstructured interviews. Conclusion: The conclusion of the study shows that HR are facing a number of challenges in their work with handling destructive conflicts in the workplace. HRs managing process needs to adjust to the specific situation, therefore HR uses different approaches in their work and the support of HR-colleagues is described as essential. We have acknowledged that many of the challenges are based on the fact that their work concerns humans. Complexity is found in that HR are involved late in the handling process, their conflict management is depending on how the involved individuals receive HRs work and that it is difficult to know which choices to make. On the other hand, it is shown to be important to actually handle the conflict.

In the sphere of labour and employment, "prerogative" is usually taken to refer to the "right to manage" an organisation. The right can be divided into those decisions which relate to the utilisation of the human resources of the organisation and decisions of an "economic" or "business" nature. This thesis focuses on the first category of decisionmaking. It is generally accepted by employers and trade unions that employers have the right to manage employees. The legal basis for this right is to be found in the contract of employment which has as one of its elements the subordination of the employee to the authority of the employer. This element affords the employer the legal right to give instructions and creates the legal duty for the employee to obey these instructions. Employers' right to manage is, however, neither fixed nor static. The main purpose of this thesis is to determine the extent of employers' right to manage employees. This is done by examining the restrictions imposed by the law {ie common law and legislation) and collective bargaining. The examination is accordingly focussed on what is Jett of employer prerogative. A number of conclusions are drawn from the examination. One of the most important conclusions reached is that, although most of an employer's common law decisionmaking powers have been statutorily regulated, none have been rescinded. The employer has accordingly retained its decision-making power, albeit in a more restricted or limited form. This makes further restriction of its decision-making power through contractual or statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. It, however, also makes the lessening or even the total removal of these restrictions through future statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. / Law / LL.D.

In linea di principio, la sentenza può essere definita come il provvedimento giurisdizionale con cui il giudice definisce la controversia, confermando o negando – nel contesto specifico del processo penale – l’ipotesi di colpevolezza dell’imputato. Sennonché, l’impostazione tradizionale – fedele ai consueti metodi dell’indagine giuridica – considera la sentenza esclusivamente in qualità di atto processuale, esaminando la relativa disciplina per individuare i requisiti di validità ed efficacia dell’atto stesso. La presente ricerca, invece, si propone di approfondire lo studio della sentenza penale quale “giudizio”, vale a dire come epilogo del percorso conoscitivo compiuto dall'organo giurisdizionale per giungere alla ricostruzione dei fatti controversi, nonché, alla loro adeguata qualificazione giuridica. In questa prospettiva, le disposizioni che regolano la formazione e i contenuti della sentenza penale vengono prevalentemente in rilievo, in quanto stabiliscono i confini e i percorsi normativi delle operazioni gnoseologiche compiute dal giudice nella fase conclusiva del processo. Esaurite le premesse di carattere metodologico (capitolo I), l’indagine prende le mosse (capitolo II) dalla ricostruzione storica e dogmatica della “sentenza penale”, poiché l’estensione della categoria in esame dipende sia dalla complessiva struttura del processo, sia dalle scelte contingenti operate dal legislatore. In seguito, si approfondisce (capitolo III) la posizione specifica della sentenza nel contesto del procedimento penale, muovendo dalle dottrine generali del processo e giungendo al ruolo che la decisione giurisdizionale assume nell’ambito del cosiddetto “giusto processo”. Nel capitolo IV, si opera un confronto fra le operazioni conoscitive che costituiscono il proprium dell’attività giurisdizionale, rispetto alle metodologie adottate – rispettivamente – nell’indagine di carattere storico e nell’ambito delle scienze sperimentali. Successivamente (capitolo V), si trattano i principali profili di ricostruzione fattuale che caratterizzano la sentenza penale: in particolare, l’attenzione si sofferma sulla configurazione delle regole decisorie tipiche del processo penale e sul dovere di motivazione che incombe sull’organo giurisdizionale. Infine (capitolo VI), viene analizzata la configurazione strutturale del cosiddetto “post dibattimento”, per dimostrare che la decisione giurisdizionale può essere solo convenzionalmente considerata come una realtà processuale unitaria (la sentenza penale), laddove l’analisi normativa lascia intravvedere una serie di comportamenti, che integrano una complessa fattispecie a formazione progressiva. / Sentence can be defined, as a matter of principle, like the decision through which the Court puts an end to the dispute, validating or denying – particularly in criminal cases – the original accusation formulated by the public prosecutor. Given this assumption, legal scholars usually consider the judicial decision merely as a procedural document, interpreting the relevant provisions in order to establish conditions for its validity and enforceability. Instead, the aim of this research is to deepen the study of the criminal judgment, understood as the conclusion of the knowledge path accomplished by the tribunal for the porpuse of reconstructing controversial events and find an adequate legal classification therof. In this perspective, legal provisions concerning the criminal decision (art. 525 ss. of the Italian code of criminal procedure) are mainly examined in so far as they determine routes and limitations for the gnoseological process, which takes place during the closing moments of the trial.

L’étude est centrée sur l’obligation pour l’employeur d’informer le salarié. La première partie met en évidence les diverses raisons d’être de ces informations obligatoires. Certaines sont liées à l’activité interne de la pensée. Elles visent soit à instaurer une discussion préalable à une prise de décision de l’employeur soit à donner au salarié la possibilité de faire preuve de discernement dans ses choix. D’autres informations sont, en revanche, liées à l’activité externe sur le monde. Certaines lui donnent au travailleur la possibilité de contrôler l’action de l’employeur tandis que d’autres lui confèrent une autonomie d’action. Cette diversité de fonctions se conjugue avec une relative unité dans les règles applicable à ces différentes obligations d’informer. L’employeur devant effectuer un acte de langage pour exécuter son obligation d’informer, il est ainsi toujours soumis aux mêmes exigences de précision, d’exactitude et de sincérité quelque soit la finalité de l’information. De même, il est parfois contraint de respecter certaines règles de forme. La diversité des sanctions de l’inexécution découle également de la nature particulière de l’information. Le salarié peut demander réparation pour le préjudice subi du fait d’un défaut d’information. Mais il peut aussi invoquer l’inopposabilité des éléments non communiquées. Enfin, il peut demander à ce que ses attentes légitimes soient protégées soit via l’interdiction de se contredire au détriment d’autrui, soit via l’effet obligatoire de l’information. / The study focuses on obligations of the employer to inform each one of its employee. The first part outlines the various roots of the obligations to inform. Some pieces of information are related to the internal activity of thought. The aim is to create a discussion prior to the employer’s decision either to give the employee the opportunity to exercise discretion. Additional information is, however, related to the activity on the external world. Some give the worker the ability to exercise a control on the employer’s action, whereas some others give an autonomy to the action. However the diversity in the functions of the oblitgaiton to inform, the rules are on the whole the same. In order to perform its obligation must express itself. This expression is always subjected to the same precision, accuracy and fairness regardless its purpose. Similarly, the employer may be forced to follow certain rules of form. The sanctions are different. Indeed, the employee may claim compensation for damages due to lack of information. But he can also invoke the unenforceability of undisclosure. Finally, he may request that his legitimate expectations are protected either through estoppel or via the binding effect of the information.

In the sphere of labour and employment, "prerogative" is usually taken to refer to the "right to manage" an organisation. The right can be divided into those decisions which relate to the utilisation of the human resources of the organisation and decisions of an "economic" or "business" nature. This thesis focuses on the first category of decisionmaking. It is generally accepted by employers and trade unions that employers have the right to manage employees. The legal basis for this right is to be found in the contract of employment which has as one of its elements the subordination of the employee to the authority of the employer. This element affords the employer the legal right to give instructions and creates the legal duty for the employee to obey these instructions. Employers' right to manage is, however, neither fixed nor static. The main purpose of this thesis is to determine the extent of employers' right to manage employees. This is done by examining the restrictions imposed by the law {ie common law and legislation) and collective bargaining. The examination is accordingly focussed on what is Jett of employer prerogative. A number of conclusions are drawn from the examination. One of the most important conclusions reached is that, although most of an employer's common law decisionmaking powers have been statutorily regulated, none have been rescinded. The employer has accordingly retained its decision-making power, albeit in a more restricted or limited form. This makes further restriction of its decision-making power through contractual or statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. It, however, also makes the lessening or even the total removal of these restrictions through future statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. / Law / LL.D.

Teisė nekaltinti savęs, apimanti draudimą versti duoti parodymus prieš save, savo šeimos narius ar artimus giminaičius - tai kiekvieno asmens konstitucinė garantija, užtikrinanti žmogaus ir valstybės santykių suderinamumą šiandieninėje konstitucinėje visuomenėje sprendžiant teisingumo klausimus. Asmuo turi teisę apginti save ir savo artimuosius nuo bet kokio pobūdžio ar sunkumo kaltinimo. Nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare principas kildinamas iš žmogaus orumo principo ir teisės į laisvą asmens vystymąsi, todėl šis principas turi būti aiškinamas neatsiejamai nuo kitų konstitucinių principų ar nuostatų, susijusių su teisingumo, draudimo piktnaudžiauti valdžia samprata, nukentėjusiųjų nuo nusikalstamų veikų bei kitų proceso subjektų interesų apsauga. Magistro baigiamajame darbe pateikiama teisės nekaltinti savęs analizė kitų konstitucinių principų kontekste. Skirtingose šalyse draudimo versti duoti parodymus prieš save principo, taikomo siekiant apsaugoti įtariamųjų ir liudytojų procesinius interesus, veikimo mechanizmas nėra vienodas. Priklausomai nuo baudžiamųjų procesinių santykių konstrukcijos bei nuo šiuose santykiuose vyraujančio teisinio reguliavimo metodo ir teisinio proceso principų, šios garantijos pobūdis ir apimtis skirtingose baudžiamojo proceso teisės doktrinose vertinami nevienodai. Tačiau, tiek bendrosios, tiek kontinentinės teisės sistemose draudimas versti duoti parodymus prieš save ar savo artimą vertinamas kaip valstybės nustatytas imunitetas, apsaugantis nuo... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The right of non-self-incrimination, that includes prohibition to compel to give evidence against oneself, family members or close relatives - is every person's constitutional guarantee to ensure human and public relations compatibility in today's constitutional society, dealing with justice issues. A person has the right to defend himself and his relatives from any type or severity of accusation. Nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare principle derived from the principle of human dignity and the right to the free development of the individual. Bearing this in mind, this principle must be interpreted through other constitutional principles or provisions relating justice, concept of prohibition of power abuse, interests protection of victims and other entities of process. Master's thesis provides the analysis of the right of non-self-incrimination in the context of other constitutional principles. In different countries the mechanism of functioning of the principle of the prohibition to compel to give evidence against oneself, applicable in order to protect suspects and witnesses interests in proceedings, is not the same. Depending on the criminal procedural relations structures and prevailing legal regulation method in these relations, the legal process principles, the nature and scope of this guarantee is treated differently in various criminal law doctrines. However, in both common and civil law systems the prohibition to compel to give evidence against oneself and family members... [to full text]

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.