Tato diplomová práce popisuje vznik a formování ekvity v systému anglického práva, její vzájemné postavení vůči common law, současné použití ekvity a některé její vývojové trendy. Teoretická část této práce je doplněna konkrétními precedenty.

The objective of this work is to evaluate the consequences of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union in the field of Private International Law, with a focus on the enforcement of civil judgments between the UK and the EU after “Brexit”. The theme is part of a broader debate, which has involved the European Institutions, the British Government and the European academia and has been focused on the identification of the relevant rules on international jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of civil judgments in Europe, after the discontinuation of the Acquis Communautaire and the Brussels Ibis Regulation. On the assumption of the uncertainty surrounding the issue and the unfortunate outcome of a “no-deal Brexit”, the discussion is first articulated over the framing of the historical and political context within which the will to withdraw has been formed and expressed and over the analysis of the different reconstructive hypotheses that have been put forward since the 2016 British vote, in order to highlight the problematic aspects and the juridical limits that prevent the usability of each. Then, on the premise that reference should be made to the national rules of Private International Law and, more specifically, to the common law, if we consider the English legal system, the reflection unfolds in a dialectical reconstruction of the legislation in question in light of the principles that govern the Brussels regime, with the aim of emphasizing the consequences of Brexit in terms of more complex procedural fulfillments and increased time and costs that will aggravate creditors whose claims require compulsory satisfaction in the United Kingdom. More generally, the comparison between the avant-garde project implemented by the European Institutions with the Recast Brussels Regulation and the outdated principles governing the matter of English conflict of laws allows a critical evaluation of the epistemological and cultural value of the British withdrawal from the European Union, since in the claims of autonomy and renewed sovereignty of the United Kingdom we must recognize the prelude of a new dialectical interaction between common law and civil law. In this respect, the challenge for scholars cannot be limited to a mere consideration of the technicalities of the new regime for the enforcement of European civil judgments in the UK after Brexit, but is enriched by an essential comparative approach that the transnational dimension of legal protection demands to be accomplished.

O objetivo desta pesquisa é estudar os binômios que ocorrem em contratos de common law à luz da Lingüística de Corpus, procurando dar subsídios que auxiliem os tradutores de textos jurídicos a chegar a uma tradução natural, ou seja, para que traduzam linguagem jurídica por linguagem jurídica. Os binômios são formados por duas palavras pertencentes à mesma categoria gramatical, ligadas pela conjunção and ou or. Alguns exemplos são: terms and conditions, any and all, executed and delivered, due and payable, action or proceeding, agreement or obligation. Os binômios são uma marca do inglês jurídico e como tal têm sido objeto de diversos estudos. O mesmo, porém, não ocorre com a linguagem jurídica em português. Assim, ao lidar com a tradução de binômios, estudos mostram que os tradutores brasileiros se apegam à opção mais literal. A escolha de estudar os binômios nos contratos de common law se deve ao fato de estarem os contratos entre os documentos mais difíceis de traduzir e de ler e por terem uma altíssima concentração de binômios. Por essas razões, para estudar os binômios na linguagem jurídica em inglês e dar elementos para o tradutor chegar à tradução em português do Brasil, compilamos um corpus comparável de agreements e contratos autênticos perfazendo, aproximadamente, 1 milhão de palavras - 705 744 em inglês e 289 984 em português - composto por 5 amostras de 28 espécies de contratos e agreements, totalizando 140 documentos em cada língua. O corpus foi explorado de acordo com os princípios e ferramentas da Lingüística de Corpus. Para etiquetar o corpus usamos o programa CLAWS 7 (the Constituent Likelihood Automatic Word-tagging System) do UCREL (Universidade de Lancaster) e para explorá-lo, o WordSmith Tools de Mike Scott. / This research aims at studying binomial expressions in common law agreements in the light of Corpus Linguistics in an attempt to provide translators with the necessary linguistic elements that will enable them to render a natural translation, that is, to translate legal language into legal language. Binomial expressions are formed by two words belonging to the same grammatical category and joined by and or or. Some examples are: terms and conditions, any and all, executed and delivered, due and payable, action or proceeding, agreement or obligation. Binomials are an integral part of English legal language and as such have deserved a considerable amount of study. The same, however, does not occur in Brazilian Portuguese legal language. Therefore, when dealing with binomial expressions, studies show that Brazilian translators tend to translate all the elements of a binomial literally. The choice of text type is due to the fact that agreements and contratos are among the most difficult documents to translate and seem to have an incredibly high concentration of binomial expressions. For said reasons, in order to study binomials in English legal language and provide elements for translators to arrive at their own translation into Brazilian Portuguese, we have compiled and explored a bilingual comparable corpus consisting of authentic agreements and contratos, totalling, approximately, 1 million words - 705,744 in English and 289,984 in Brazilian Portuguese - made up of 5 samples of 28 different kinds of contratos and agreements, a total of 140 documents in each language. Exploring such a corpus greatly depended on the principles and tools of Corpus Linguistics. To tag the corpus we used UCREL\'s CLAWS 7 (the Constituent Likelihood Automatic Word-tagging System) and to explore the corpus we used Mike Scott\'s WordSmith Tools.

Thesis (LL.M.) --University of Limpopo, 2010 / Refer to document

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Münster, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references.

Zugl.: Uppsala, University, Diss., 2006. / Includes bibliographical references and index.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1987. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [251]-258) and index.

Any contractual operation has a risk, which can be assumed by one of the parties, as agreed. In this context, it is common for cases of delays due to concurrent causes imputable to both parties, which can generate a high difficulty when assigning the risk. In this article, the author explains, from a comparative perspective, the different possibilities of solution in front of cases related with the concurrent delay controversies. It analyzes the various doctrines developed both in the Civil Law tradition and in the Common Law. / Toda operación contractual conlleva un riesgo, el cual puede ser asumido por una de las partes según lo convenido. En ese contexto, es habitual que se presenten casos de demora (por causas concurrentes imputable a ambas partes, lo cual puede generar una gran dificultad al momento de asignar el riesgo. En el presente artículo, el autor explica, desde una perspectiva comparada, las diferentes posibilidades de solución frente a las controverisas relacionadas con la mora concurrente. Se analiza las diversas doctrinas desarrolladas tanto en la tradición del Civil Law como del Common Law.

Within the past decade, there has been considerable debate amongst lawyers in most European and North American jurisdictions on standardized contracts. The realisation that these contracts did not fit into the framework of the law of contract elaborated by nineteenth-centry theorists, induced judges and academic alike to fashion concepts and mechanisms in order to tackle the undoubted injustices which were concomitant with the use of standardized contracts. These well meaning attemtps, while affording some protection to weaker contracting parties, were nevertheless productive of uncertainty and inconsistency. Hence, there has been in recent years a spate of legislation designed to deal with standardized contracts directly or indirectly. The adoption of modern economic institutions and also of Western legal systems in Cameroon has brought about significant problems in the realm of contract. The widespread illiteracy in Cameroon, the lack of commercial sophistication of the bulk of the populace, and the use of standardized contracts, have created problems of a much wider dimension than those to be found in the developed countries. This thesis involves a study in comparative law. It charts the ways in which the English and French courts have addressed the problems of standardized contracts. It also delves into how the Cameroonian courts have dealt with them, revealing the incongruities inherent in the application of concepts which have been evolved in a different country with distinct motives, in another country with entirely different social realities. Finally, this thesis looks at the legislative innovation; brought to this area of the law by four European countries and discerns what lessons can be learned from them by Cameroonian legislators in dealing with the problems of standardized contracts in Cameroon. All this is achieved by pulling together legal analysis and comments by Anglo-Americans and European scholars, and by weaving into the text nearly all important English, French, Cameroonian and indeed American cases on this subject.

In any contractual operation, risks are presented, which have a significant cost in economic operations. In view of this, the parties, in exercise of their contractual freedom, regulate the allocation of risks in the most appropriate way to their needs, seeking efficiency. In this article, the author explains the importance of risks in contractual operations, the reason for the modification of legal provisions of risk allocation, and why contracts should be interpreted literally. / En toda operación contractual, se presentan riesgos, los cuales tienen un costo significativo en las operaciones económicas. Ante ello, las partes, en ejercicio de su libertad contractual, regulan la asignación de los riesgos de la forma más acorde a su necesidad, buscando la eficiencia. En el presente artículo, el autor explica la relevancia de los riegos en las operaciones contractuales, la razón de la modificación de las disposiciones legales de asignación de riesgo y por qué los contratos deben interpretarse literalmente.