This dissertation examines the application and effect of Article 1 of the First Protocol to the ECHR in relation to Scots land law reform. Chapter one will reflect on why existing rights to property have come to be challenged. Chapter two sets out the human rights paradigm and scrutinises what rights and whose rights are engaged. Chapter three traces the development of A1P1. Chapter four applies the human rights paradigm to contemporary reforms. Chapter five considers the broader effect A1P1 has had on domestic property law. This dissertation submits that the problem to be overcome is that, in many instances, Scots land law reform has been reduced into a simplistic struggle. A1P1 has been held up as either a citadel protecting landowners or as an ineffective and unjustified right to be ignored. At the core of this debate are competing claims between liberal individualist rights to property and socially democratic, egalitarian goals. This dissertation argues that it is important to move beyond this binary debate. This is not about finding some mysterious "red card" or eureka moment that conclusively shows compatibility or incompatibility. Instead, compatibility will be determined by following a rule-based approach that values rational decision-making and the best available evidence, as well as the importance of democratic institutions. As such, it will be illustrated how future challenges are likely to focus not on the underlying purpose of land law reform but on the macro or micro granularity of Ministerial discretion. In coming to this conclusion, it will be argued that A1P1 has a pervasive influence on the entire workings of all public bodies and, like a dye, permeates the legislative process.

<p>The aim of this thesis is to use a power perspective to describe the workers’ struggle for co-determination in the Swedish labour market during the period 1890–1939. The study explores how trade unions in general attempted to limit article 23, which asserted employers’ control over hiring and dismissal. At the same time the study clarifies differences in union power between various groups of workers. The prevalent historical view regarding the distribution of power in the labour market is thus questioned.</p><p>The study shows that workers were not powerless before the Saltsjöbaden agreement in 1938. In certain areas workers, through their unions, already at the beginning of the 20th century had fairly good possibilities of influencing both hiring and dismissal. Collective agreements that were entered into before the defeat of the workers in the great conflict in the Swedish labour market in 1909, as well as collective agreements signed during the 1920s and 1930s, can make both the Saltsjöbaden agreement and present-day regulations look “hostile to workers”. In collective agreements workers achieved considerable limitations of employers’ arbitrary freedom to hire and dismiss workers. Certain unions could control their labour market efficiently by means of a labour exchange of their own. The development, however, varied over time and between different trade unions. Business cycles generally influenced how much power unions could exert. Access to power resources and other conditions varied between different workers’ groups. While some attained considerable power over hiring and dismissal, others had no possibilities of taking part in decision-making.</p>

The aim of this thesis is to use a power perspective to describe the workers’ struggle for co-determination in the Swedish labour market during the period 1890–1939. The study explores how trade unions in general attempted to limit article 23, which asserted employers’ control over hiring and dismissal. At the same time the study clarifies differences in union power between various groups of workers. The prevalent historical view regarding the distribution of power in the labour market is thus questioned. The study shows that workers were not powerless before the Saltsjöbaden agreement in 1938. In certain areas workers, through their unions, already at the beginning of the 20th century had fairly good possibilities of influencing both hiring and dismissal. Collective agreements that were entered into before the defeat of the workers in the great conflict in the Swedish labour market in 1909, as well as collective agreements signed during the 1920s and 1930s, can make both the Saltsjöbaden agreement and present-day regulations look “hostile to workers”. In collective agreements workers achieved considerable limitations of employers’ arbitrary freedom to hire and dismiss workers. Certain unions could control their labour market efficiently by means of a labour exchange of their own. The development, however, varied over time and between different trade unions. Business cycles generally influenced how much power unions could exert. Access to power resources and other conditions varied between different workers’ groups. While some attained considerable power over hiring and dismissal, others had no possibilities of taking part in decision-making.

企業併購商譽產生係由「併購公司投資成本」與「被併購公司可辨認淨資產公平價值」產生差異所致，本文先由「併購商譽攤銷」之行政訴訟進行分析，進而研究我國稅捐稽徵機關是否應當發展公平價值評價審查制度以解決相關租稅爭議。另外由於在我國102年起上市櫃公司全面採用國際財務報導準則的前提下，透由我國上市櫃公司於102年度之商譽減損測試執行狀況，將該分析結果與國際現況進行比較，試圖了解我國上市櫃公司之商譽會計政策是否隱藏併購公司高估商譽之風險，並進而探討公司負責人於併購時點所作之投資決策，是否有「經營判斷原則」之適用？在此混沌不明的過渡期間中，本文希望透過此研究而呼籲我國監理機關能盡早正視此一問題。 / M&A Goodwill arises from the difference of "M&A investment cost" and "the acquired company's identifiable net assets at fair value" .This study analyzes the administrative litigation about the " amortization of goodwill" at first. Further we study that whether the tax authority should develop the examination system of fair value evaluation to resolve disputes related to income tax. In addition , science Taiwan Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) formally announced that all listed companies must apply International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) after year 2012, we summary the the Goodwill impairments during year 2013 evaluated by the listed companies and compare with the international status ,trying to understand the listed companies`s accounting policy and weather the M&A Goodwill is without evaluation . At last, this study discuss when responsible person of the corporation high paying to the acquired company whether there is "business judgment rule" applicable? In this chaotic period, this study hopes that this research result could let FSC to notice this issue as soon as possible.

本論文主要是在探討現行公平交易法第四十五條「依照著作權法、商標法或專利法行使權利之正當行為，不適用本法之規定」，其中有關專利權之部分。蓋專利權屬於智慧財產權之一種，係國家以法律授予私人的一種獨占、排他權利，亦即，專利權人就其所獲之專利請求範圍，係處於一種法定專有排除他人未經其同意而製造、販賣、使用或進口該專利之獨占權能地位。專利法藉由此一賦予專利權人特定期間之專屬排他權 (Exclusive Right)/獨占壟斷權，以提供一定之經濟上利益為誘因，藉此鼓勵發明人『公開』符合可專利要件；而競爭法制係為維護公平、自由競爭秩序與環境而必須規範獨占、聯合、結合等限制競爭行為及不公平競爭行為，兩者之糾結關係應如何釐清？素有經濟憲法高地位之稱之競爭法制，應如何在法律特設專利獨占權之制度目的考量下，揮舞它這把大刀？又法律特設專利獨占權之制度目的，又會如何影響競爭法制規制專利權利之界線，是本文想要探究、嘗試解決之議題亦為本文研究目的所在。 鑑於目前我國對於公平交易法第四十五條之法律定位爭議甚大，復以目前我國對於專利權之正當權利行使行為之實務摸索尚處於萌芽之未臻成熟階段，本文擬以專利制度之制度目的及專利財產之本質出發，再借鏡國美國法制百餘年之行政執法、司法實務之實證觀察方式，試圖對目前我國越來越多之專利權權利行使與公平交易法之交錯相關議題及爭議，提出一些可能的思考方向與解決之道，並以法律體系解釋、法律目的解釋、市場經濟以及專利制度之制度目的等思維角度，嘗試定義公平交易法第四十五條之專利權正當權利行使行為，並將本文所建議之審查基準與審查步驟作成審查流程圖，作為本文之總結。

No description available.

I evaluate four possible approaches the United States may take to address China's practice of undervaluing the renminbi: 1) a challenge under Article XV of the GATT and the associated IMF provisions; 2) countervailing duties; 3) antidumping measures; and 4) safeguard measures. I conclude that the first three approaches are unlikely to succeed; there are a number of legal and political obstacles to the pursuit of these remedies. While the current WTO safeguards regime is likely insufficient, a new safeguards regime can--and should--be developed. I review and critique Dani Rodrik's proposal for a new safeguards regime and set out my own basic blueprint for a significantly expanded safeguards regime, emphasizing that flexibility in the realm of international trade law would help to secure overall stability in international trade itself. In order to be effective shock absorbers, safeguards must become far more flexible.

I evaluate four possible approaches the United States may take to address China's practice of undervaluing the renminbi: 1) a challenge under Article XV of the GATT and the associated IMF provisions; 2) countervailing duties; 3) antidumping measures; and 4) safeguard measures. I conclude that the first three approaches are unlikely to succeed; there are a number of legal and political obstacles to the pursuit of these remedies. While the current WTO safeguards regime is likely insufficient, a new safeguards regime can--and should--be developed. I review and critique Dani Rodrik's proposal for a new safeguards regime and set out my own basic blueprint for a significantly expanded safeguards regime, emphasizing that flexibility in the realm of international trade law would help to secure overall stability in international trade itself. In order to be effective shock absorbers, safeguards must become far more flexible.

本論文主要在討論，先決之爭點與「爭端解決規則與程序瞭解書（DSU）」第六條二項（成立小組請求）間之互動。 首先，作者區別成立小組請求兩大要件，分別為：敘明系爭措施及提供法律根據已釐清系爭案件。 其次，在此架構下，本文進而從近來所發生之四十七個爭端解決案件中，分析上訴機構對兩要件之認定標準的發展。本文發現，爭端解決小組及上訴機構透過放寬先決爭點認定標準之結果，會降低成立小組請求之明確性。同時，本文也蒐集相關實證統計資料，藉以呈現先決爭點如何影響DSU之功能。經由歸納後，本文認為，當前先決之爭點的負面影響大於正面影響。 再者，儘管先決爭點有上述問題，作者一方面仍肯定先決之爭點的正面功能，並認同爭端解決實務放寬認定標準之趨勢；另方面，則嘗試提出若干工具以避免上述負面影響大過正面影響。 最後則提出第六條第二項之修法建議。 關鍵字：爭端解決規則與程序瞭解書（DSU）第六條二項、成立小組請求、先決之爭點 / This thesis focused on the interaction between the preliminary issues and Article 6.2(panel request) of Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing The Settlement of Disputes(DSU). First, the author distinguished the two main requirements of panel request: identify the specific measures at issue, and provide a brief summary of the legal basis of the complaint sufficient to present the problem clearly. Secondly, with the two requirements as framework, the author started to scrutinize how preliminary issues affected recent 47 dispute settlement cases and analyze its implication. Then, it was observed that the Dispute Settlement Panel and the Appellate Body were broadening their review standards as to preliminary issues, which would then lead to reduce the precision of panel request. Meanwhile, this thesis collected relevant statistic data to show how the preliminary issues affected the current DSU function. Then, it was observed that the preliminary issues, so far, had strong negative effects and few positive effects on the dispute settlement system. Moreover, the author, on the one hand, recognized the function of preliminary issues and viewed current dispute settlement practice as good trend with some deficit; and, on the other hand, tried to propose some useful tools to prevent the negative effect to overcome positive effects. And eventually, proposed revision of Article 6.2 of DSU. Key words: Article 6.2 of Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing The Settlement of Disputes (DSU), panel request, preliminary issues

O presente trabalho, plasmado em metodologia jurídica, reflete criticamente sobre o problema da motivação da sentença civil como elemento de organização e de funcionamento do Estado Constitucional Democrático de Direito. A motivação é condição essencial de jurisdicionalidade, no sentido de que sem motivação não há exercício legítimo da função jurisdicional. O trabalho faz uma abordagem da natureza da motivação como discurso justificativo, jurídico e racional, da validade dos critérios de escolha ou de valoração empregados pelo juiz em sua decisão. O raciocínio do juiz é apresentado sob dupla feição: raciocínio decisório interno (contexto de descoberta ou deliberação) e raciocínio justificativo externo (contexto de justificação ou de validação). O conjunto das funções técnico-instrumental (endoprocessual) e político-garantística (extraprocessual) é objeto de investigação. A motivação, nos planos teórico e prático, exerce também a função de garantia do garantismo processual. A tese da inexistência jurídica da sentença tem três eixos teóricos: omissão total da motivação gráfica; falta de motivação ideológica, equiparada à hipótese de ausência de motivação gráfica; incompatibilidade lógica radical entre as premissas ou entre as premissas e a conclusão final, que também equivale à ausência total de motivação. O trabalho retrata um modelo de injustiça atemporal vivificado pelo juiz Crono, oposto à motivação como inestimável fator de legitimação argumentativa da jurisdição. A obrigatoriedade de motivação pública é o traço característico da jurisdição de nossa contemporaneidade e representa a maior conquista civilizatória do processo équo e justo. / This work, shaped in juridical methodology, critically reflects on the problem of motivation of civil judgment as an element of organization and functioning of the Democratic Constitutional State of Law. Motivation is an essential condition of jurisdiction, in the sense that without motivation there is no legitimate exercise of the jurisdictional function. The work makes an approach to the nature of motivation as a justificative discourse, juridical and rational, of the validity of choice or valuation criteria employed by the judge in its decision. The reasoning of the judge ispresented in double feature: internal decision-making reasoning (context of discovery or deliberation) and external justificative reasoning (context of justification or validation). The set of the technical-instrumental function (endoprocedural) and the political-rights assurance function (extraprocedural) is object of investigation. Motivation, in the theoretical and practical levels, also exerts the function of guarantee of the procedural right assuring mechanism. The thesis of the juridical validity of the judgment has three theoretical axes: total omission of the graphical motivation; lack of ideological motivation, equated to the hypothesis of nonexistence of the graphical motivation; radical logical incompatibility between the premises or between premises and the finalconclusion, which is also equivalent to the total lack of motivation. The work depicts a model of timeless injustice vivified by the judge Crono, opposite to the motivation as an invaluable factor of argumentative legitimacy of jurisdiction. Mandatory public motivation is the characteristic feature of the jurisdiction of our times and represents the greatest civilizing conquest of equal and fair proceeding.