The following diploma thesis is called "The writ of execution and authorization of a licensed executor". I have chosen this theme because this execution and execution procedure is a dynamically developing part of the civil law and has been changed substantially in recent years. I deal mainly with the legislation in regards to the petition for an execution order, an execution order as well as a termination of authorization of an licensed executor to carry out the execution. The aim of the thesis is to acquaint the reader with current legislation, compare current legislation with previous legislation and identify ambiguities and issues encountered in practice. The thesis is divided into five chapters. The first one is a preface and the last a conclusion. The second chapter deals with the petition for an execution order, especially requirements, defects and their remedies. Further, I pay attention to execution title and its particular types. In the end I outline the possibility of the proposed limitations on the territorial scope of an licensed executor de lege ferenda. The third chapter deals with the execution procedure and authorization of a licensed executor. I describe how the court can decide on the petition for the execution order. Separately I deal with an execution decision, its delivering,...

La distinction de l'imperium et de la jurisdictio est une des plus anciennes distinctions de la science juridique européenne. Entre les mains du souverain, la jurisdictio est le pouvoir de rendre la justice et l'imperium celui d'user de la force. Cette souplesse notionnelle permet à la distinction de structurer l'intégralité du droit judiciaire privé. Dans ce cadre, la jurisdictio se présente alors comme le pouvoir de réalisation formelle du Droit – le Droit est dit – alors que l'imperium vise sa réalisation matérielle – le Droit est fait –. Cette perspective fonctionnelle permet de recouvrir les différents pouvoirs des organes judiciaires, le juge, bien sûr, mais aussi l'arbitre, l'huissier de justice, le greffier, le notaire ou le commissaire-priseur judiciaire. Mais l'intérêt de la distinction ne s'arrête pas là. À l'échelle du jugement, d'abord, la jurisdictio se présente comme la source de l'autorité de la chose jugée ou de l'authenticité alors que l'imperium est à l'origine de sa force, obligatoire ou exécutoire. À l'échelle de l'office du juge, ensuite, le succès de la procédure de référé ou les transformations des contentieux familiaux et économiques se traduisent par un renforcement de l'imperium au détriment de la jurisdictio et par le glissement de la judicature vers la magistrature. À l'échelle de l'exécution forcée, enfin, le juge de l'exécution ou la procédure d'exequatur illustrent la nécessité d'un encadrement de l'imperium par la jurisdictio. Et c'est ainsi, par un jeu dialectique permanent entre intelligence et volonté, entre autorité et contrainte, bref, entre jurisdictio et imperium, que le droit processuel garantit au droit substantiel sa sanction et son triomphe. / The distinction between imperium and jurisdictio is one of the most ancient distinctions in European juridical science. In the hands of the sovereign, jurisdictio is the power to dispense justice, and imperium is the power to use force. This notional flexibility enables the distinction to structure the whole private judicial law. In this specific frame, jurisdictio is the power to formalize law – law is pronounced – while imperium aims at its concrete realization – law is materialized. This functional perspective can include all the powers of the judge, and also the powers of the arbitrator, the bailiff, the court clerk, the notary or the judicial auctioneer. But this is not the only interest of the distinction. Firstly, when it comes to the judgment, jurisdictio is the source of the authority of res judicata, or of the authenticity, while imperium is the origin of its force, whether in the binding force or the enforceability. Then, concerning the function of the judge, we can see that the success of the summary procedures, or the transformations of family and commercial litigations, present as a reinforcement of imperium at the cost of jurisidictio, and as a shift from judicature to magistrature. Finally, when it comes to the enforcement, the judge of execution or the procedure of exequatur show the necessity to supervise imperium with jurisdictio. Thus, through a constant interaction between intelligence and willpower, between authority and coercion, that is, in short, between jurisdictio and imperium, the procedural law guarantees the triumph of substantive law.

Esta tese de doutorado estuda os requisitórios: precatórios e requisições de pequeno valor, sob o prisma do Direito Financeiro. Com esse objetivo se estuda o desenvolvimento dos requisitórios e suas regras atuais, tanto em termos de determinações constitucionais, quanto nas questões orçamentárias, da dívida pública e do controle das finanças públicas, questionando também a forma como se dá a execução contra a Fazenda Pública por quantia certa em outros países do mundo. / This doctoral thesis studies, through the prism of Financial Law, the payments of money owed by the Federal Treasury, by State Treasury, by Federal District Treasury, or by Municipal Treasury, by virtue of a court decision (writ of execution against Public Treasury or writ of execution of a small amount of money against Public Treasury). For this purpose we study the development of payments of court decisions and its current rules, both in terms of constitutional provisions, budget issues, public debt and internal and external audit of public money used to pay court decisions, also questioning how this payment is done by Public Treasury in other countries.

Les actes juridiques privés sont des titres exécutoires pour lesquels l’acte fondamental sur lequel est apposé la formule exécutoire est un acte juridique privé. C’est le cas des actes notariés, des accords homologués par un juge, des procès-verbaux de conciliation exécutoires, du procès-verbal de non-paiement d’un chèque impayé rendu exécutoire par l’huissier de justice. La loi Macron ajoute à cette famille de titre exécutoire les accords homologués par un huissier de justice pour les petites créances. La procédure d’établissement de ces titres exécutoires se déroule sans aucun contrôle juridictionnel. Dès lors, il est question de savoir si les conditions d’établissement et de mise en œuvre des actes juridiques privés exécutoires sont satisfaisantes au regard, d’une part des critères de définition et des effets du titre exécutoire et d’autre part de l’exigence du respect des droits fondamentaux aussi bien procéduraux que substantiels ? Si non, existe-t-il un remède légal et/ou jurisprudentiel à cette insuffisance ? Celui-ci le cas échéant, est-il satisfaisant ? / The private legal acts are writs of execution for which the fundamental act on which is affixed the enforceable formula is a private legal act. It is the case of notarial acts, agreements approved by a judge, enforceable reports(fines) of conciliation, by report(fine) of nonpayment of an unpaid check made enforceable by the bailiff. The law Macron adds to this family of writ of execution the agreements approved by a bailiff for the small claims(debts).The procedure of establishment of these writs of execution takes place without any jurisdictional control. From then on, it is about to know if the conditions of establishment and implementation of the enforceable private legal acts are satisfactory in the look, on one hand the criteria of definition and effects of the writ of execution and on the other hand the requirement of the respect for the fundamental rights so procedural as substantial? If not, there is a legal and/or case law remedy in this insufficiency? Is this one where necessary, satisfactory?