Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Felipe Blanco Garcia Guimaraes Fleury.pdf: 1343341 bytes, checksum: 7fe6474c605c38190ffb1fa5a6253c19 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-10 / It is intended, through this work, investigate administrative violations and sanctions provides in Laws 8.666/93, 10.520/02, 12.462/11 e 12.846/13, applicable to bids and contracts. To achieve this purpose, first we analyze the defining elements of the legal and administrative violation and sanctions, studying its structure, contents and implementation. That done, we studied the aspects and topics related to them of the administrative violations and sanctions. At the end, set these premises, we fixed the content, scope and application of the administrative violations and sanctions provided in these laws, from the interpretation of the rules that form part of its legal system / Pretende-se, por meio deste trabalho, investigar as infrações e sanções administrativas previstas nas Leis 8.666/93, 10.520/02, 12.462/11 e 12.846/13, aplicáveis às licitações e contratos administrativos. Para tanto, primeiramente nos debruçamos sobre os elementos definidores das infrações e sanções jurídicas e administrativas, estudando a sua estrutura, o seu conteúdo e sua aplicação. E, ao assim proceder, aprofundamos o estudo dos ilícitos e penalidades administrativas, enfrentando cada um dos seus aspectos e os temas a eles correlatos. Por fim, com amparo nestas balizas, gizamos o conteúdo, alcance e aplicação das infrações e sanções administrativas em espécie, previstas nas Leis de Licitação; do Pregão; do RDC; e de Anticorrupção, a partir da interpretação das normas que integram o seu regime jurídico

Tiriamoji problema. Vienas iš būdų užtikrinti visuomenėje tvarką – teisinės atsakomybės priemonių už padarytus teisės pažeidimus taikymas. Tarp šių teisinės prievartos priemonių ypatingą vietą užima administracinės atsakomybės priemonės – administracinės sankcijos. Dėl padaromų administracinių nusižengimų gausos, siekiant užtikrinti jų, o taip pat ir nusikalstamų veikų, prevenciją iškyla efektyvaus ir greito reagavimo poreikis. Nors valstybės reakcija į teisės pažeidimus pasireiškia jurisdikcinės funkcijos, demokratiniais principais tvarkomoje valstybėje atitenkančios teismui (vienai iš trijų valdžios šakų) vykdymu, socialinė tikrovė liudija apie vis didėjantį vykdomosios valdžios institucijų vaidmenį sprendžiant teisinės atsakomybės dėl padarytų nusižengimų klausimus. Šiandien pagal Lietuvos Respublikos Administracinių teisės pažeidimų kodekso nuostatas įgaliojimai bausti už administracinius teisės pažeidimus patikėti keliasdešimčiai viešojo administravimo institucijų. Ar tokia situacija neprieštaraujan valdžių padalijimo principui ir kuo toks teisinis reguliavimas galėtų būti pagrįstas? Iš tiesų, Lietuvos, ir ne tik, administracinės teisės moksle neretai keliama administracinių teisės pažeidimų, o kartu ir administracinių sankcijų legitimumo problema, susijusi su administracinėms institucijoms priskiriama teisingumo vykdymo funkcija. Juk administracinė institucija, bausdama kad ir už administracinius teisės pažeidimus, tampa savitu kvaziteismu, užsiimančiu jurisdikcine... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Research problem. One of the ways to ensure public order is to impose sanctions for breach of law. Administrative sanctions as a remedy of administrative liability have a special place among the remedies of legal constraint. There is a need of effective and quick reaction to tackle great number of administrative offences and to ensure adequate prevention of administrative offences as well as criminal acts. Although the state responds to offence by implementing the jurisdictional function, which in a state governed under democratic principles is carried out by the court (one of the three constituent elements of governance), social reality testifies that the role of executive institutions in resolving the issues of legal liability for offence is increasing. Under currently effective provisions of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Lithuania authorization to impose sanctions for administrative offence is granted to a few tens of public administration institutions. Does such a situation correspond to the principle of separation of powers and what is the basis of such legal regulation? In fact, Lithuanian, and not only, science of Administrative Law often raises the problem of administrative offence as well as the problem of legitimacy of administrative sanctions which is closely related with the justice implementation function of administrative institutions. Actually, the administrative institution while imposing sanctions for administrative offence becomes a... [to full text] / Функция применения санкций за правонарушения, иначе называемая юрисдикционной, в демократических государствах традиционно предписана суду. В то же время в сегодняшней Литве право рассматривать дела по административным правонарушениям и применять административные санкции доверено десяткам институций публичного администрирования, которые в процессе реализации своих юрисдикционных полномочий становятся своеобразными квазисудами. Считается, что данная ситуация противоречит Конституции и нарушает общепризнанный принцип раздел��ния властей, а посему подлежит изменению. Поэтому целью исследования диссертации является системное рассмотрение и оценка правовых основ в юрисдикционной деятельности квазису��ебных институций, принципов, применяемых в юрисдикционной деятел��ности этих институций, и внесения предложений по совершенствования Литовского института административной ответственности. Основываясь на правовом регламентировании, конституционной и административной юриспруденции, доктрине административных санкций Франции, Италии, Испании, Германии, Бельгии, США и др. делается вывод, что административные санкции, примуняемые квазисудебными институциями, потенциально действенный институт, играющий роль социального регулятора, а воплощаемая юрисдикционная деятельность этих институций в аспекте конституционной легитимности приемлема для правовой системы демократического государства. Оценивая административную ответственность как одну из jus puniendi государства, в диссертации анализируются... [полный текст, см. далее]

La pénalisation est depuis longtemps la réponse privilégiée à la singulière augmentation des tromperies, abus de faiblesse, violences ou encore refus du consentement d'autrui à un contrat. Si son ampleur impressionne, cette pénalisation connaît certains travers. Les incriminations sont mal rédigées et leur construction se révèle rapidement incohérente. Mais par dessus-tout, le droit pénal paraît dans bien des cas dévoyé. Même lorsqu'elle n'est utilisée qu'à titre d'auxiliaire de disciplines ou réglementations externes, la sanction pénale répond à certaines finalités propres, au regard desquelles elle doit apparaître nécessaire et proportionnée. Ce dévoiement doit se résoudre par une certaine dépénalisation des atteintes au consentement contractuel. Pour que celle-ci n'entraîne pas une baisse de la protection des contractants, il convient de rechercher des substituts crédibles à la sanction pénale, par conséquent efficaces et adaptés au contentieux des atteintes au consentement contractuel. Il importe également que ces substituts offrent des mesures originales, sous peine de n'opérer qu'une dépénalisation purement symbolique. Cela doit conduire à écarter les sanctions administratives, au profit de la voie civile. Cette dernière doit toutefois être renforcée pour pallier les insuffisances que le droit civil présente actuellement dans la prévention et la sanction des atteintes au consentement contractuel. / Priority has long been given to criminalisation in response to the important increase in the commission of fraud, fraudulent abuse of vulnerable persons, duress, or other refusals of consent in the contractual field. Whilst the scope of this criminalisation is impressive, it also raises questions. The offences are poorly circumscribed, and their constructions turn out to be incoherent. Above all, criminal law appears in many cases diverted from its proper function. Even when criminal law is used as an auxiliary enforcement to other disciplines or external regulations, the resort to the criminal penalty follows its own ends according to which it should appear necessary and proportionate. This diversion must be resolved through a decriminalisation of refusals of consent in the contractual field. In order to avoid diminishing the protection of contractors, it is necessary to search for credible substitutes to criminal penalties, which are both effective and adapted to litigation involving the infringement of contractual consent. In order to amount to more than purely symbolic decriminalisation, these substitutes should also consist of innovative measures. Administrative sanctions must be discarded in favour of the civil law route. Civil sanctions must however be reinforced in order to overcome the existing limitations and drawbacks faced by civil law in the prevention and sanctioning of refusals of consent in the contractual field.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:28:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marcia Pelegrini.pdf: 1004190 bytes, checksum: 26daaa45de58a2c587839433123a8662 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-10-31 / The present paper s objective is to analyse sanction competence given by constituent legislator to Court of Accounts as its function as controller. The legal dispositive analyses consubstantiated with VIII point, article 71 of Federal Constitution, resulted on observation that the mentioned punitive competence finds boundaries consubstantiated on the bills irregularities aspects and expenses illegalities, such points must orient the infraconstitutional legislator on illicit conducts determination and controlling organ on sanction application, in a way which some infractions prior in Federal Law 8.443/ 92 are in disagreement with the constitutional orientation. It is also approached on the aspect related to sanction legal nature applied by Court of Accounts, although it is of administrative nature, comes from his control function. The sanctioned norms named by the doctrine as open and elastic can be allowed, when the censored conduct discretion and respective sanction can make feasible the advance science of the individual, because such norms, themselves, cannot remove the incidence of typicity s principle. Besides that, the existence of the sanction norms linked by generic clauses leads to comprehension of regulament must be taken as relevant instruments to accomplish the mission of, without innovation, describe in a detailed way on conducts generically foresight in the law as illicit, even though in a exhaustive way, but through the exemplar roll to orient the individuals and limit the action of the norm applicant, as well as similar situations. The sanction appliance will only be validated if realised through legal procedures that assures the opportunity of defence in its plenitude, through clause observance of the due process of law and its resulting principles, situation in which some of Penal Law s own principles will be incided. At last, the cited procedure must be subjected to a reasonable deadline, analogically inciding, faced with Court of Accounts Organic s Law silence, the punitive pretension prescription deadline established by Federal Law 9.873/ 99 / O presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar a competência sancionatória conferida pelo legislador constituinte ao Tribunal de Contas da União, no exercício da função de controle. A análise do inciso VIII do artigo 71 da Constituição Federal resultou na constatação de que a referida competência punitiva encontra limites consubstanciados nos aspectos da irregularidade de contas e ilegalidade de despesas, vetores estes que devem orientar o legislador infraconstitucional na determinação das condutas ilícitas, e o órgão controlador na aplicação das sanções, de forma que algumas infrações previstas na Lei Federal nº 8.443/92 estão em desacordo com a orientação constitucional. Aborda-se também o aspecto relacionado à natureza jurídica da sanção aplicada pela Corte de Contas, que embora seja de natureza administrativa, decorre do exercício da função de controle. Assim, conquanto o legislador deva adotar cautelas para não criar situações de conflito na aplicação das mesmas sanções cujas competências estejam conferidas a autoridades integrantes dos órgãos controlados, os influxos decorrentes da função fiscalizatória afastam a caracterização do bis in idem não tolerado pelo direito pátrio, diante das diferentes áreas de atuação. As normas sancionadoras denominadas pela doutrina de abertas ou elásticas podem ser admitidas, quando a descrição das condutas censuradas e das respectivas sanções possa viabilizar a antecipada ciência dos indivíduos, porque tais normas, por si sós, não afastam a incidência do princípio da tipicidade. Além disso, a existência de normas sancionatórias veiculadas por cláusulas genéricas leva ao entendimento de que os regulamentos devem ser tidos como instrumentos relevantes para cumprimento da missão de, sem inovar, descrever de forma mais detalhada as condutas genericamente previstas na lei como ilícitas, ainda que não o façam de forma exaustiva, mas exemplificativa a orientar os indivíduos e limitar o âmbito de atuação do aplicador da norma, inclusive acerca de situações assemelhadas. A aplicação da sanção só será válida se realizada por meio de procedimento legal que assegure a oportunidade de defesa em sua plenitude, mediante a observância da clausula do devido processo legal e dos princípios dela decorrentes, situação em que incidirão alguns princípios próprios do direito penal. Por fim, referido procedimento deve se sujeitar a um prazo razoável de duração, incidindo analogicamente, diante do silêncio da Lei Orgânica do Tribunal de Contas da União, o prazo prescricional da pretensão punitiva estabelecido na Lei Federal nº 9.873/99

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:30:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marcos Moreira de Carvalho.pdf: 435273 bytes, checksum: 86ad979e424d5411b4e2ca256a6ab9a8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-05-13 / This work carries out a juridical analysis of the administrative sanction declaration of ineligibility. This is a type of penalty regulated in Law 8,666/93, which applies to private bidders and contractors that intentionally or culpably cause harm to the public interest, or transgress principles and rules that govern the juridical system of Administrative Law. The study is based, clearly, on the text of the Law, with emphasis on the content of the sanctioning act, through the use of the deductive method, identifying within the functions of the State the administrative function through to the exercise of sanctioning activity in relations between parties to contracts, and bidding procedures. We conclude that it is possible to apply this sanction, in accordance with the legislation in force, without the need for the inclusion of new rules. The lack of academic works on this subject, and its relevance today, prompted us to analyze the declaration of ineligibility / O trabalho tem por fim analisar juridicamente a sanção administrativa - declaração de inidoneidade. Trata-se de uma espécie de penalidade prevista na Lei 8.666/93, aplicável aos particulares licitantes e contratados que, dolosa ou culposamente, causarem prejuízo ao interesse público ou transgredirem princípios e regras informadores do regime jurídico de Direito Administrativo. O estudo parte, por óbvio, do texto da Lei, com ênfase ao conteúdo do ato sancionador, para mediante utilização do método dedutivo, identificar dentre as funções do Estado a função administrativa até o exercício da atividade sancionadora nas relações contratuais e nos procedimentos licitação. Concluímos pela possibilidade de se aplicar tal sanção, consoante a legislação vigente, sem necessidade de inclusão de novas regras. A falta de monografia sobre o assunto e a sua atualidade encorajou-nos a detalhar a declaração de inidoneidade

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:19:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Decio Gabriel Gimenez.pdf: 1389513 bytes, checksum: 9512940015616e7305783d3af232b11a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-10-27 / The purpose of the present work is to comprehend one of the hypotheses of extinction of the effects caused by administrative acts, such as that one which results from the non-compliance by the addressee of obligations identified in the Brazilian Law. This hypothesis deserves a specific treatment, once it is submitted to a peculiar law regime, resultant of its qualification as administrative sanction. Therefore, the administrative act has been contained within the realm of administrative function, drawn afterwards to an overview of the hypotheses of its extinction and under a dogmatic methodological perspective, in order to identify and detach, among the kinds of State declarations with revoking efficiency, that one which has as presupposition the practice of an imputable administrative illicit to the addressee of the act, henceforth called cassation act. Moreover, this work aims to identify, taking the structural focus of the administrative act and the juridical regime that regulates the edition of administrative sanctions, what are the limits to the edition of the State declarations here discussed. To reach this purpose, this study approaches the object, the fundaments, the presupposition and the juridical effects of the cassation act. Finally, this work also treats the control of this kind of administrative act, focusing the actions exerted by the Judiciary / O presente trabalho tem por finalidade compreender uma das hipóteses de extinção dos efeitos dos atos administrativos, qual seja, a que decorre do inadimplemento de deveres pelo destinatário, com o intuito de identificar se, no direito brasileiro, ela merece um tratamento específico, em razão de estar submetida a um regime jurídico peculiar, decorrente de sua qualificação jurídica como espécie de sanção administrativa. Para tanto, localiza-se o ato administrativo no âmbito do exercício da função administrativa e traça-se um panorama das hipóteses de sua extinção, a partir de uma perspectiva metodológica dogmática, a fim de identificar e destacar, dentre as espécies de declarações estatais com eficácia extintiva, aquela que tem como pressuposto a prática de um ilícito administrativo imputável ao destinatário do ato, rotulada então como ato de cassação. Em seguida, a partir de um enfoque estrutural do ato administrativo e do regime jurídico que regula a edição de sanções administrativas, procura-se identificar quais são os limites para a edição das declarações estatais em foco. Para atingir esse objetivo, estuda-se o objeto, o fundamento, os pressupostos e os efeitos dos atos de cassação. Ao final, trata-se do controle dessa espécie de ato administrativo, com enfoque para o exercido pelo Poder Judiciário

La résolution des litiges est couramment considérée comme une fonction exclusivement juridictionnelle. Les recours portés devant les juridictions sont appelés recours contentieux et la procédure juridictionnelle serait la procédure contentieuse. Devant l’administration, la procédure serait non contentieuse et les recours seraient des pétitions gracieuses. Or, tant l’administration française que l’administration colombienne tranchent quotidiennement des litiges dans l’exercice d’une fonction contentieuse qui n’est pas nouvelle. Dès lors, l’exclusivité juridictionnelle du contentieux n’est qu’une vision déformée de l’organisation du pouvoir. La résolution administrative des litiges est l’une des prérogatives de puissance publique dont dispose l’administration. Elle se caractérise par son caractère accessoire de la mission administrative principale; il s’agit d’un instrument de la réalisation des finalités de l’action administrative. L’administration tranche les litiges dans l’exercice de sa fonction administrative : les décisions administratives contentieuses n’ont pas force de chose jugée, pouvant être l’objet du contrôle juridictionnel qui décidera définitivement le litige. Cette fonction administrative est conforme à la théorie de la séparation des pouvoirs dont l’interprétation séparatiste ne se réalise ni en France ni en Colombie. Cependant, l’administration n’exerce pas sa fonction contentieuse à chaque fois qu’un recours administratif est exercé, qu’une procédure de sanction administrative est entamée ou qu’un litige opposant deux particuliers est porté à la décision de l’administration. L’activité contentieuse de l’administration exige qu’un véritable contentieux soit présenté à l’administration, que ce contentieux se matérialise devant l’administration et qu’elle tranche unilatéralement le fond du litige. Dans ce cas, l’administration n’exerce une fonction ni matériellement juridictionnelle ni quasi contentieuse, mais une véritable fonction contentieuse. / Dispute resolution activity is commonly considered as a wholly judicial function. Judicial actions against the administration and the procedure followed by Courts would be referred as “contentious”, while actions and procedures before administrative bodies would be described as “non-contentious”. Still, both Colombian and French administrations may resolve disputes on a daily basis as a result of longstanding “contentious” missions. Therefore, a vision that reduces this “contentious” to the solely judicial activity distorts this reality in power organization theory. The administrative resolution of disputes is an incidental prerogative of the public administration. It is characterized by its attachment to the main administrative mission, it is an instrument for the purposes of administrative action. The administration resolves disputes as part of its administrative function: administrative “contentious” decisions have not the force of a final judgment, and could be subject to judicial review. Administrative “contentious” missions seem to conform to a non-rigid vision of the separation of powers shared by Colombian and French systems. However, the administration does not performs a “contentious” activity every time an administrative action or an administrative sanction procedure is undertaken, or when it has to decide a controversy opposing two individuals. Administrative “contentious” activity demands a real “contentious” to be materialized before the administration, which also decides the bottom of the dispute. In that case, the administration does not perform a judicial or quasi-judicial mission, but just a real “contentious” mission

De multiples sanctions répondent à la violation du droit de la consommation. Ces sanctions sont perçues comme des outils indispensables au respect de ce droit. Leur prolifération ainsi que leur caractère dérogatoire au droit commun sont pourtant fréquemment dénoncés. Surpénalisation, prime à la mauvaise foi des consommateurs, automaticité, intrusion du juge dans la sphère contractuelle, atteindraient leur légitimité. L’instrumentalisation des sanctions provoquerait leur confusion et leur dénaturation généralisée. La pénalisation des sanctions civiles et la banalisation des sanctions pénales sont particulièrement critiquées. Mais ce double mouvement est-il systématique ? Ce travail entend apporter une réponse plus nuancée. L’abstraction de la protection offerte aux consommateurs exige certains aménagements. Saisir l’essence des sanctions devient alors nécessaire afin identifier celles qui participent d’un dévoiement. Certaines sanctions seront ainsi réhabilitées. D’autres, à l’inverse, seront condamnées. Après avoir mesuré le dévoiement des sanctions du droit de la consommation, une remise en ordre s’est avérée indispensable. Diverses propositions ont ainsi été formulées, dans une quête constante d’équilibre entre efficacité et validité, afin que l’effectivité du droit de la consommation soit elle-même mieux assurée. / Multiple sanctions respond to violations of consumer law. These sanctions are perceived as essential tools for the respect of this right. However, their proliferation and their derogatory nature from ordinary law are frequently denounced. Over-criminalisation, primacy over bad faith on the part of consumers, automaticity, intrusion by the judge into the contractual sphere, would achieve their legitimacy. The instrumentalization of sanctions would lead to their confusion and general distortion. The criminalisation of civil sanctions and the trivialisation of criminal sanctions are particularly criticised. But is this double movement systematic ? This work aims to provide a more nuanced response. Abstracting from the protection offered to consumers requires certain adjustments. Understanding the essence of sanctions then becomes necessary in order to identify those that participate in a misuse. Some sanctions will thus be rehabilitated. Others, on the other hand, will be condemned. After having measured the misuse of consumer law sanctions, it was essential to put them in order. Many proposals were then formulated, so that the effectiveness of consumer law could be better ensured.