Économiquement et politiquement, la société occidentale est menée par deux ensembles que sont l’Union européenne et les États-Unis d’Amérique. D’un point de vue juridique, cette distinction répond à une autre qu’est celle entre les États de tradition romano-germanique et ceux de common law. Aujourd’hui, cette distinction s’estompe tant ces deux systèmes juridiques se confondent. Sur la forme d’abord, les droits de common law recourent de manière croissante aux droits statutaires, et inversement les droits continentaux laissent une place grandissante à la jurisprudence et notamment à celle de la Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne. Sur le fond ensuite, ces deux systèmes juridiques et leurs pendants économiques s’unifient autour d’une économie de marché qu’ils souhaitent protéger des comportements nuisibles aux consommateurs, aux concurrents, et donc in fine au marché lui-même. Or, cette protection nécessite, notamment, d’imposer une loyauté lors de l’emploi de pratiques commerciales par des professionnels vis-à-vis de consommateurs.C’est pourquoi, le 11 mai 2005, a été promulguée une directive relative aux pratiques commerciales déloyales des entreprises vis-à-vis des consommateurs qui harmonise de façon maximale la qualification de ces pratiques sans traiter de leur régime juridique. Dès lors, il semble nécessaire de comparer les systèmes européen et anglo-américain, notamment par la considération de la théorie des economic torts, afin d’étudier si ces derniers pourraient s’enrichir l’un de l’autre. Il sera ainsi démontré que si la qualification poursuit les mêmes raisonnements, la réaction face à de tels comportements est quant à elle plus nuancée. / Economically and politically, the Western society is led by two main sets which are the European Union and the United States of America. Juridically, this distinction matches with a more general one wich can be observed between traditional romano-germanic states and those submitted to the common law. Nowadays, this distinction tend towards disappearance because of the intermingling of these two legal systems. Indeed, regarding the form first, common law states resort more and more to statutory laws, and conversely, traditional romano-germanic laws leave a growing room for the case law, and especially, for the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice. In substance then, because those two legal systems correspond to two economic systems unified around a market economy. They want to protect it against damaging behaviours for consumers, competitors, and in fine for the market itself But this protection require in particular to order fairness during the use of business-to-consumer commercial practices. That is why, the European Parliament and the Council, announced a directive concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market, which contains maximum harmonisation provisions about unfair commercial practices, but without provisions about their juridical regime. Then, it seems necessary to compare the European system with the American one, especialy with the consideration of the theory of the economic torts, in order to study if these two can enrich each other. So, it will be demonstrated that if the classification follows the same arguments on either side of the Atlantic, the responses to those behaviours is more contrasted.

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

Univ., Diss.--Basel, 2006.

OPSOMMING Gebeurlikhede kan omskryf word as onsekere omstandighede van positiewe of negatiewe aard wat, onafhanklik van die verweerder se optrede en indien dit sou realiseer, waarskynlik 'n persoon se gesondheid, inkomste, verdienvermoë, lewenskwaliteit, lewensverwagting of onderhoudsafhanklikheid in die toekoms kan beïnvloed of in die verlede kon beïnvloed het en wat gevolglik op billike en realistiese wyse in ag geneem moet word ter bepaling van die skadevergoedingsbedrag. Die skadevergoedingsbedrag kan vanweë gebeurlikhede verminder of vermeerder word waar die eiser wel met `n oorwig van waarskynlikheid die volle omvang van die skade bewys het, maar die hof nie kon oortuig dat geen ander oorsaak die skade waarskynlik ook sou kon veroorsaak nie (sg "gebeurlikheids-aanpassings"). In gevalle waar die eiser nie die volle omvang van die skade op `n oorwig van waarskynlikheid kon bewys nie, kan die hof nogtans `n verminderde bedrag toeken op grond van die gebeurlikheid dat die skade wel waarskynlik in die toekoms kan realiseer (sg "gebeurlikheidstoekennings"). Die eiser moet getuienis voorlê van gebeurlikhede wat die skadevergoedingsbedrag sal verhoog, en die verweerder van gebeurlikhede wat die skadevergoedingsbedrag sal verlaag. Die waarskynlikheid dat die gebeurlikheid sal realiseer, moet deur die hof aan die hand van objektiewe maatstawwe en op grond van feitelike bewerings en logiese afleidings uit deskundige en ander getuienis in die vorm van `n waarskynlikheidsgraad van tussen vyf persent en tagtig persent uitgedruk word. Hipotetiese kousaliteit word deur die hof aangewend om gebeurlikhede op `n billike wyse in ag te neem en verwys na die kousale ketting van hipotetiese feite wat waarskynlik sou gerealiseer het indien die skadestigtende gebeurtenis nie plaasgevind het nie. Gebeurlikhede kan in twee kategorieë geklassifiseer word: Algemene gebeurlikhede wat gewoonlik in enige stadium by alle persone kan voorkom (bv vroeë dood, siekte ens) en spesifieke gebeurlikhede wat gewoonlik op spesifieke tydstippe by spesifieke individue kan voorkom (bv hertroue, egskeiding ens). Terwyl die hof geregtelik kennis behoort te kan neem van die invloed van algemene gebeurlikhede, behoort die hof hoofsaaklik op grond van ondersteunende getuienis van die invloed van spesifieke gebeurlikhede oortuig te word. Algemene gebeurlikheidsaanpassings is gewoonlik relatief laag (gemiddeld tien persent), terwyl gebeurlikheidsaanpassings vir spesifieke gebeurlikhede fluktueer (gewoonlik tussen vyf persent en vyftig persent), afhangende van die getuienis en omstandighede van die eiser. Gebeurlikheidstoekennings is gewoonlik laer as vyftig persent. SUMMARY Contingencies can be described as uncertain circumstances of a positive or negative nature which, independent of the defendant's conduct and if it should realise, would probably influence a person's health, income, earning capacity, quality of life, life expectancy or dependency on support in future or could have done so in the past, and which must consequently be taken into account in a fair and realistic manner in the quantification of damages. Contingencies can be used to increase or reduce damages in circumstances where the plaintiff succeeded in proving the full loss on a preponderance of probability, but could not convince the court that there was no probability that any other cause could also have given rise to the loss (so-called "contingency adjustments"). In circumstances where the plaintiff could not prove the full loss on a preponderance of probability, the court can nevertheless award a reduced amount on the basis of the contingency that loss could probably realise in future (so-called "contingency allowances"). The plaintiff must adduce evidence of contingencies that can increase damages, and the defendant of contingencies that can reduce damages. The degree of probability that the contingency will realise, must be expressed by the court as a percentage of between five percent and eighty percent, in view of objective measures and on the basis of factual allegations and logical deductions derived from expert and other evidence. Hypothetical causation assists the court in taking account of contingencies in a fair manner and refers to the causal link of hypothetical events which would probably have realised if the damage-causing event did not occur. Contingencies can be classified into two categories: General contingencies that usually can be present in the lives of all people at any point in time (eg early death, sickness, etc) and specific contingencies that usually are present in the lives of specific individuals at specific times (eg remarriage, divorce, etc). While the court should be able to take legal notice of the influence of general contingencies, the court should be convinced of the influence of specific contingencies primarily on the basis of supporting evidence. General contingency adjustments are usually relatively low (on average ten per cent), while contingency adjustments for specific contingencies fluctuate (usually between five per cent and fifty per cent), depending on the evidence and circumstances of the plaintiff. Contingency allowances are usually lower than fifty per cent. / Jurisprudence / LL.D

Text in Afrikaans / Summary in English / Until recently damages were only awarded in South African law for the loss of an object which was utilised for the generation of income. In Kellerman v South African Transport Services' damages were awarded for the first time for the loss of use of an object, which was used for non-business purposes. In this dissertation the writer aims to indicate that the personal loss that a plaintiff suffers by the loss of the object is so closely related to the physical possession through which it is served, that the Jaw should protect such personal interest. In such circumstances damages should be awarded in principle, irrespective of whether the plaintiff used the object for business purposes or whether he indeed hired a substitute or not. There is room in the South African law for development in the area of delictual damages for the Joss of the possibility to use a material object. / Private Law / LL.M.

A dissertação trata da responsabilidade especial prevista no art. 40 da Lei 6.024/74 para os administradores de instituições financeiras frente aos credores sociais na hipótese da quebra da instituição. É discutida a natureza dessa responsabilidade, se objetiva ou subjetiva, buscando seu exato conteúdo. O tratamento adotado é interdisciplinar, envolvendo diversas áreas do direito e da economia. O direito constitucional fornece a tábua de valores para o sistema, impondo limites, e a teoria geral do direito contribui com a análise do conteúdo e a finalidade das normas de responsabilidade, com o regramento prudencial do Banco Central servindo para o detalhamento das condutas. São então utilizadas as ferramentas de análise econômica do direito, particularmente a teoria dos jogos para a modelagem de um regime de responsabilidade subjetiva, e outro de responsabilidade objetiva, como jogos estratégicos, na forma normal e na extensiva, identificando os pontos de equilíbrio e de eficiência, O resultado aponta para uma ineficiência do modelo de responsabilidade objetiva para o administrador. O modelo de responsabilidade subjetiva revela-se mais eficiente, apontando como desejáveis as ferramentas de delação premiada e inversão do ônus de prova, para mitigar problemas de assimetria de informação entre depositante e instituição financeira. A dissertação conclui que a responsabilização objetiva do administrador seria inconstitucional e ineficiente, e que o regime jurídico atual é de responsabilidade subjetiva, mas que pode ser aprimorado, especialmente tornando mais claras as regras aplicáveis. / The dissertation analyzes financial institutions\' managers\' special liability to creditors in the event of bankruptcy, as established by Brazilian Law 6.204/74 article 40. Its discussed the nature of such a liability, whether a negligence standard or strict liability rule, seeking to clarify its full extent. The approach is interdisciplinary, using many fields of both law and economics. Constitutional Law provides the goals and values for the system, and General Theory of Law contributes to analyzing the content and purpose of liability rules, with the Central Bank\'s prudential supervision rules detailing actions. The tools of economic analysis of law are then used, particularly game theory to model a system based on a negligence standard, and another based in a strict liability standard, as strategic games in both normal form and extensive form, identifying the points of equilibrium and efficiency. The result points to an inefficient model of strict liability for the administrator. The model based on a negligence standard is shown to be more efficient, pointing as desirable tools that grant immunity to whistleblowers and reverse the burden of proof, to mitigate problems of asymmetric information between depositors and financial institutions. The dissertation concludes that the strict liability of the manager would be unconstitutional and inefficient, and that the current legal regime is that of negligence standard liability, but it can be improved, particularly by clarifying the rules.

A presente dissertação teve como objetivo geral analisar a Rede de Atendimento que se constitui a partir do adolescente privado de liberdade no Centro de Socioeducação de Pato Branco – PR (Cense), o lócus da pesquisa. O Cense é uma instituição estadual que atende aos adolescentes em cumprimento de medidas socioeducativas de internação em virtude do cometimento de ato infracional. Para atender o que preconiza a legislação específica para adolescentes privados da liberdade o Cense necessita integrar a Rede de Atendimento do município e utilizar-se dos recursos disponíveis na comunidade. Para analisar a Rede buscou-se suporte teórico e metodológico na Teoria Ator- Rede a qual tem como principal autor Bruno Latour. Apresenta também, uma discussão sobre a modernidade e a separação que esta provocou criando polos: entre sociedade e natureza, humanos e não-humanos, especialistas e leigos. Esta divisão é questionada pela Teoria Ator-Rede, a qual aponta caminhos para analisar a constituição dos coletivos (associações). O Estudo apresenta de forma breve, a trajetória da constituição das instituições de atendimento aos adolescentes privados de liberdade no Brasil e no Paraná. Na qual, se apontam as condições materiais destes sujeitos que estão distantes dos benefícios das promessas da modernidade. A pesquisa utilizou-se de alguns instrumentos: observação participante, diário de campo, entrevistas e formulários com questões abertas. Para representação da Rede formada a partir das indicações dos entrevistados utilizou-se da ferramenta Ucinet 6 ®. Em síntese, as análises sinalizaram que a Rede formal criada pelas normativas e legislações não se apresenta como um recurso que poderia ser acessada plenamente pelos adolescentes privados da liberdade. Que a Rede acessada pelos adolescentes integram mais elementos não formais do que as instituições legalmente constituídas. E, que a articulação entre as diferentes instituições governamentais e não-governamentais ainda se constituiu um ideal a ser alcançado. / The present dissertation had as general objective to analyze the Network of Attendance that is constituted from the adolescent deprived of freedom in the Center of Socioeducation of Pato Branco - PR (Cense), the locus of the research. Cense is a state institution that serves adolescents in compliance with socio-educational measures of deprivation due to the commission of an infraction. In order to meet the requirements of the specific legislation for adolescents deprived of liberty, Cense needs to integrate the Municipal Service Network and use the resources available in the community. In order to analyze the Network, theoretical and methodological support was sought in the Theory-Actor Network whose main author is Bruno Latour. It also presents a discussion about the modernity and the separation it has created by creating poles: between society and nature, human and non-human, specialists and lay people. This division is questioned by the Actor-Network Theory, which points out ways to analyze the constitution of the collectives (associations). The study briefly presents the trajectory of the constitution of institutions for the care of adolescents deprived of their liberty in Brasil and Paraná. In which, it is pointed out the material conditions of these subjects that are far from the benefits of the promises of modernity. The research used some instruments: participant observation, field diary, interviews and forms with open questions. For the representation of the Network formed from the interviewees indications, the Ucinet 6 ® tool was used. In summary, the analyzes indicated that the formal network created by norms and laws is not a resource that could be fully accessed by adolescents deprived of their liberty. That the Network accessed by adolescents integrate more non-formal elements than legally constituted institutions. And, that the articulation and between the different governmental and non-governmental institutions still constituted an ideal to be reached.

This is a Master´s Degree Dissertation that agrees with the premise that Law cannot be dissociated from Moral and with the conclusion that leads to the path to rationalize moral values in the juridical atmosphere. In that way, constitutional jurisdiction attempts its objectives and legitimates itself upon social medium by using juridical argumentation´s methods, which must be particularly respected, in Brazil, in the sphere of the analysis of administrative improbity´s acts. At the same time, Constitution is not only the main juridical text of a given State, endowed with normative power and imperative norms, but represents, fundamentally, the great variety of mankind knowledge´s lines, as well as it is guided by a truly axiological sense. Based in that post-positivist context, this Master´s Degree Dissertation comments about the Administrative Improbity Law (Brazilian Federal Law nº 8.429/1992) by offering, initially, a general panorama of the above-mentioned law; soon after, it specifies the object of study with its species and penalties. Finally, this work shows study about the necessity to establish a procedure tending to investigate the real occurrence of an improbity act and, in that way, it is put forward another contribution, intending to rationalize the fixation of Administrative Improbity Law s sanctions, together with the application of Proportionality. / Trata-se de Dissertação de Mestrado que concorda com a premissa de que o Direito não pode ser dissociado da Moral e com a conclusão que conduz ao caminho de racionalizar a inserção dos valores morais na atmosfera jurídica. A jurisdição constitucional, neste sentido, cumpre seu papel e se legitima perante o meio social quando utiliza métodos de argumentação jurídica, os quais devem ser particularmente respeitados, no Brasil, na esfera de análise de atos de improbidade administrativa. Paralelamente, a Constituição não é apenas o principal texto jurídico de um Estado, dotado de força normativa e normas imperativas, como também representa, fundamentalmente, as mais diversas linhas do conhecimento humano, além do que, é norteada por um verdadeiro sentido axiológico. Baseada em tal contexto póspositivista, esta dissertação discorre a respeito da Lei da Improbidade Administrativa (Lei nº 8.429/1992) oferecendo, inicialmente, um panorama geral do referido diploma normativo para, logo depois, especificar o objeto de estudo nas modalidades e nas sanções nela contidas. Finalmente, o presente trabalho mostra estudo a respeito da necessidade de ser estabelecido um procedimento tendente a apurar a efetiva ocorrência de atos ímprobos para que, passo seguinte, seja apresentada outra contribuição, no sentido de racionalizar a aplicação das penalidades da Lei da Improbidade Administrativa, com o necessário uso da Regra da Proporcionalidade.

L’obligation et le devoir sont très souvent confondus. Pourtant, leur distinction est fondamentale. La présente étude propose de les distinguer en puisant le critère de la distinction dans la structure et dans la source de la situation de passivité envisagée. Sous l’angle de sa structure, l’obligation se distingue du devoir par l’existence d’un débiteur et d’un créancier déterminés. La structure de l’obligation permet de la distinguer des devoirs à sujets indéterminés. Néanmoins, ce critère ne suffit pas à distinguer l’obligation des devoirs à sujets déterminés. Il doit être combiné avec un second critère tiré de la source de la situation de passivité. Sous l’angle de sa source, l’obligation dérive de l’autorité seule de la loi ou de l’intervention du débiteur. La source de l’obligation permet de la distinguer des devoirs extra-légaux et des devoirs extra-juridiques. La distinction de l’obligation et du devoir est utile. À cette distinction s’attachent des intérêts pratiques dans le contentieux de la responsabilité civile et en dehors de ce contentieux. Mais, l’obligation et le devoir ne sont pas séparés par une cloison étanche. Leur distinction est caractérisée par sa souplesse et il existe des ressemblances entre les deux notions. Séparés par leur structure et par leur source, l’obligation et le devoir se rapprochent par l’objet et par le sujet. Il en résulte qu’une même personne peut être tenue d’accomplir la même prestation en vertu d’une obligation et en vertu d’un devoir. / Obligations and duties are often confused. However, their distinction is fundamental. The present essay proposes to distinguish the two concepts by drawing the criterion of distinction in the structure and the source of the situation of passivity. In terms of structure, the obligationdiffers from the duty by the existence of a determined debtor and creditor. The structure of the obligation separates it from duties that do not exist between two determined parties. Nevertheless, this first criterion is insufficient. It does not make it possible to distinguish between obligations and duties that exist between determined parties. Therefore, it must be combined with a second criterion that is drawn in the source of the situation of passivity. In terms of its source, obligations derive from the rule of law or the intervention of the debtor. The source of the obligation separates it from non-statutory duties and non-legal duties. The distinction between obligations and duties is useful. It has practical use within liability proceedings and outside such proceedings. However, the present essay does not merely highlight the differences between obligations and duties. Their distinction is flexible, in that it reveals similarities between the two concepts. Separated by their structure and their source, obligations and duties have a similar object and a similar subject. In effect, the same person may be required to accomplish the same performance under an obligation or under a duty.

Le droit international privé français tient pour usuel la dissociation entre le conflit de lois et le conflit de juridictions. Cette indépendance entre les deux corps de règles est érigée en principe tant par la doctrine majoritaire que par le droit positif. Selon ce principe, toute forme de corrélation est et doit être réfutée, qu’elle opère au moment de la mise en œuvre des règles de conflit ou de leur construction. En d’autres termes, ce sont ainsi trois hypothèses qui sont dénoncées : celle de l’applicabilité directe de la lex fori en tant que telle, mais également celles de la compétence du forum legis et du parallélisme des règles de conflit, celles-ci conduisant à une applicabilité indirecte de la lex fori. Or, selon la présente étude, le droit international privé des obligations montre qu’un tel principe n’existe pas et qu’il n’est pas nécessairement opportun. En effet, et un tel constat s’impose, tant le mécanisme des lois de police que le jeu de l’autonomie de la volonté suscitent une applicabilité directe de la lex fori. Par ailleurs, la réfutation des modes de corrélation indirecte est inopportune. D’une part, la compétence du forum legis permet de garantir l’effectivité des lois de police, dans la mesure où aucun autre remède ne se révèle suffisant. D’autre part, la spécialisation du droit international privé des obligations et l’emprise du droit de l’Union européenne sur cette discipline génère des règles de compétence et de loi applicable qui présentent un certain parallélisme qui n’est pas uniquement accidentel. La thèse invite ainsi à remettre en question certains dogmes classiques du droit international privé des obligations. / French private international law holds as usual the dissociation between choice of law and judicial jurisdiction. This independence between the two sets of rules is set up as a principle by both majority doctrine and law. According to this principle, any form of correlation is and must be refuted, whether it occurs at the time of implementation of the conflict rules or the time of their formulation. In other words, three hypotheses are thus denounced: that of the direct applicability of the lex fori as such, but also those of the jurisdiction of the forum legis and the parallelism of the conflict rules, which lead to an indirect applicability of the lex fori. However, according to this study, contracts and torts private international law shows that such a principle does not exist and that it is not necessarily appropriate. Indeed, both the mechanism of overriding mandatory provisions and freedom of choice of law give rise to a direct applicability of the lex fori. Moreover, the refutation of indirect correlation modes is inappropriate. On the one hand, the jurisdiction of forum legis makes it possible to guarantee the effectiveness of overriding mandatory provisions, insofar as no other remedy is sufficient. On the other hand, the specialisation of contracts and torts private international law and the influence of European Union law on this discipline generate rules of judicial jurisdiction rules and applicable law that present a certain parallelism that is not only accidental. The thesis thus invites us to question certain classic dogmas of private international law of obligations.