Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2017-03-03T15:48:43Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Ida Beatriz de Luca_.pdf: 5910574 bytes, checksum: 2b2ca8a5fa1f0adb7cd1dd025ef08b76 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-03T15:48:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Ida Beatriz de Luca_.pdf: 5910574 bytes, checksum: 2b2ca8a5fa1f0adb7cd1dd025ef08b76 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-01-05 / Nenhuma / O Direito Contratual passou por diversas fases, estando inserido em um contexto onde cada vez mais a técnica traz desafios aos operadores do Direito. Através das cláusulas gerais há a possibilidade de incorporação de situações novas, possibilitando o ajustamento das consequências jurídicas a esses novos fatos sociais. O objetivo geral da tese foi estudar o contrato na realidade atual, especialmente quanto à questão da autonomia privada nos contratos de gestação de substituição, vinculado aos princípios constitucionais, no âmbito das possibilidades jurídicas trazidas pelo horizonte hermenêutico da comparação entre o Direito Brasileiro e o Direito dos Estados Unidos da América. O papel do intérprete passou a ser mais significativo, delimitando o alcance da norma através da interpretação, buscando o significado de algumas expressões tal como função social, na Constituição Federal e no diálogo com outras fontes do Direito. Na perspectiva da metodologia fenomenológico-hermenêutica que sustenta esta Tese, se pode afirmar que o intérprete tem cada vez mais responsabilidade pela atribuição criativa de sentido às cláusulas gerais que estão nos textos regulatórios pertinentes. A evolução da técnica trouxe novos desafios aos operadores do Direito. Neste contexto, a ausência de legislação no Brasil para os casos de gestação de substituição gera situações problemáticas para todos os envolvidos: a gestante de susbtituição, os pais intencionais e mesmo a comunidade médica. Diante da referida ausência legislativa para regular as relações dessa natureza, o Conselho Federal de Medicina editou uma resolução restringindo o Direito das partes envolvidas nestes acordos. A hipótese apresentada está na ressignificação da autonomia privada das partes envolvidas nos acordos de gestação de substituição, resguardando a dignidade da pessoa humana nessas relações contratuais, bem como os Princípios Fundamentais do Direito, alinhando ainda o Sistema Constitucional e o Sistema Internacional dos Direitos Humanos, relacionados ao tema, no panorama da fusão de horizontes entre o Direito Nacional e Direito Estrangeiro. Concluiu-se que tal resolução não pode restringir Direitos Fundamentais Individuais constitucionalmente protegidos, tal como o direito de liberdade, que neste caso pode ser entendido como a livre escolha de querer gestar um embrião para outra pessoa. Com relação ao Direito Contratual brasileiro, o modelo de contrato que mais se aproxima aos acordos de gestação de substituição é o contrato de prestação de serviços, porém destaca-se que neste caso existem peculiaridades a serem observadas em decorrência do tipo de atividade que será prestada. Em razão disso, há necessidade de avaliar a real autonomia da vontade da futura gestante de substituição, uma vez que existe Direito de Personalidade envolvido neste negócio jurídico. Neste sentido, a legislação pátria tem permitido uma relativização do caráter de indisponibilidade dos Direitos de Personalidade o que demonstra serem plenamente lícitos os contratos de gestação de substituição, mesmo de caráter oneroso, desde que as partes estejam exercendo sua real autonomia privada. Objetivando a criação de um modelo normativo de contrato de gestação de substituição para a ser utilizado no Brasil, foi efetuado um estudo de direito comparado utilizando-se a legislação e a análise de casos em três Estados dos Estados Unidos da América, buscando na experiência do Direito alienígena a possibilidade de, através do diálogo entre as fontes de direito estrangeiras estudadas e as fontes de direito brasileiras, construir um modelo jurídico para regular as gestações de substituição no Brasil. O modelo normativo sugerido engloba a necessidade de verificação da real autonomia privada da mulher que irá gestar o embrião através de avaliação médica e psicológica, acompanhamento por advogado na elaboração do contrato em razão da natureza dos direitos envolvidos nesse tipo de negócio jurídico, e ainda homologação judicial do acordo, a serem realizados antes do início da execução do contrato. Essas regras foram extraídas da fusão dos modelos normativos dos EUA no sentido de encontrar uma melhor solução para a realidade brasileira. / The Contract Law has adjusted throughout history, being today inserted in an environment where faster technological evolution brings remarkable challenges for its interpreters. General clauses usually allow the definition of legal consequences to new situations and social facts. The general goal of this this thesis was to study the contract under actual and current reality, especially regarding the private autonomy in surrogate motherhood contracts, linked to constitutional principles, in the scope of the legal possibilities brought by the hermeneutic horizons of comparing the Law in Brazil and in the United States of America. The role of the interpreter has been more important establishing the scope and extension of the legal norm via interpretation, looking for the meaning of expressions such as “social function” in the Federal Constitution and through dialogue with other sources of Law interpretations. Under the phenomenological hermeneutic methodology applied to this thesis, it is possible to affirm that the interpreter has increased responsibilities attributing creative meaning to the general clauses existent in the regulatory texts. Recent technology developments have brought new challenges to the Law operators. In this new context, the lack of legal regulations in Brazil for cases of surrogate motherhood poses problematic situation for all parts: the surrogate pregnant, the intended parents and even the medical professionals. Due to the absence of legal framework to regulate the relations involved in such technique, the Federal Council of Medicine published a resolution restricting the rights of potential parts involved in such agreements. Nevertheless, such resolution cannot restrict constitutionally protected Fundamental Individual Rights, such as the right to liberty, which in this case can be interpreted as the right to elect to generate an embryo for another person. The hypothesis is a re-evaluation of the private autonomy of involded parts in agreements of surrogate motherhood, protecting the human dignity in these contractual relations, as well as the fundamental principles of the Law, aligning the Constitutional System and the International Huma Rights System, related to the subject, in the landscape of combined horizons of National Law and Foreign Law. Concerning the Brazilian Contract Law, the closest “contractual model” for a surrogate motherhood is the “rendering services contracts”, however it is important to mention that some peculiarities must be considered due to the specific type of services being rendered. Because of this, the actual private autonomy of the future pregnant must be evaluated, since there are Personality Rights also involved in such legal agreement. As a rule, in Brazil, Personality Rights cannot be relinquished. However, in some existing cases, this rule can be relativized, which demonstrates that such agreements can be licit, even those involving payments to the pregnant, as long as the parts private autonomy have been clearly established. To develop a normative model for surrogate motherhood to be used in Brazil, a research was conducted in three states of the United States of America. The objective is to help to build a legal framework for surrogate motherhood in Brazil based on both foreign and Brazilian sources of law. The suggested legal framework prescribes that the actual private autonomy of the woman to become pregnant must be verified through the following: medical and psychological evaluation; legal advice on the contract wording due to the nature of involved right; and court homologation of the agreement, prior to its execution. Such framework is derived from a combination of norms in the United States of America, properly adjusted to better fit the local realities in Brazil.

Inom svensk rätt saknas det lagregler för en situation där ett aktieägaravtal med vitesklausul strider mot ett legalt förbud i ABL. Anledningen till att denna situation blir problematisk är att aktieägaravtalet ses som ett separat rättsförhållande mellan aktieägarna, vilket inte binder bolaget bolagsrättsligt. Att ett aktieägaravtal inte binder aktiebolaget bolagsrättsligt hindrar dock inte aktieägarna från att ingå aktieägaravtal vilka indirekt får samma effekt som om aktiebolaget vore bundet av vad som stadgas i aktieägaravtalet. I små aktiebolag förhåller det sig ofta som så att en aktieägare antingen sitter med i styrelsen eller är verkställande direktör för aktiebolaget. Detta gör att en aktieägare, i egenskap av aktieägare, kan ingå ett aktieägaravtal med en annan aktieägare om exempelvis att denne skall fatta ett specifikt beslut i egenskap av verkställande direktör eller styrelseledamot. I ABL finns ett antal legala förbud som stadgar vad ett bolagsorgan får respektive inte får göra. Tanken med ett legalt förbud är att det i form av tvingande lagstiftning förbjuder ett visst handlingssätt som lagstiftaren vill komma till rätta med. Komplikationen då ett aktieägaravtal står i strid med ett legalt förbud i ABL är att ABL:s regler inte är tillämpliga på aktieägaravtalet. Detta gör att aktieägaravtalet kringgår den tvingande lagstiftningen i ABL. För att komma till rätta med detta problem har lagstiftaren överlämnat åt domstolen att i varje enskilt fall där syftet med avtalet är att kringgå den tvingande lagstiftningen pröva om ett sådant avtal skall anses vara giltigt eller ej enligt en allmän rättsgrundsats. Denna bedömning skall enligt praxis undersöka det överträda (1) förbudets syfte, (2) konsekvenserna av ogiltighetspåföljden och (3) behovet av ogiltighet som sanktion i det specifika fallet. Genom att använda sig av denna modell kan man komma fram till om ett specifikt legalt förbud i ABL skall anses inneha tillräckligt stort skyddsvärde för att ogiltighetssanktionen skall drabba aktieägaravtalet.

During the later half of the 20th century standard form contracts began to be used more frequently in contract situations. This trend has been consistent and in today’s world numerous commercial parties employ such contracts in their business transactions. The reasons for the extended use of standard form contracts are the benefits that can be obtained for the parties such as time efficiency, effectiveness and price advantages. Standardised contracts often regulate certain issues of the contract for example the way of delivery, remedies and complaints. The definition of such contracts is corresponding in Sweden and England as contracts containing in advance standardised terms with an aim to be used similarly in contract situations with most clients or customers. As the usage of standard form contracts increased, the number of unfair contract terms also enhanced. Therefore, the legislative powers in Sweden and England realised that the rules concerning the freedom of contract had to be restricted and governed. As a result, the legislative powers introduced an open control device through statutory control. This was done in Sweden in 1976 with the enforcement of Section 36 of the Contracts Act, and in England the year after when UCTA came into force. The statutory control in both Sweden and England makes it possible to appraise the fairness of exemption clauses. The statutory control is not identical in the two states. UCTA only concerns exclusion clauses and limitation clauses regarding contract terms and non-contractual notices. In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general doctrine of unfairness and Section 36 of the Contracts Act can set aside all kinds of agreements. The statutory control is complemented by indirect means of controlling the content of a contract through non statutory methods. The non statutory methods are concerned with the incorporation, interpretation and construction of clauses in a contract. To be valid and for a party to be able to rely on a term it must have been incorporated into the contract. The rules concerning the interpretation of standard form contracts and exclusion clauses are also of great importance. In both states the approach held is that the statutory control should be used preferably over the indirect control means, though the indirect means still has a prominent role in England through common law. Both England and Sweden agree on that the weaker party in a contract situation is in a greater need of protection by the rules of law in unfair contract situations. However unfairness can only arise if the superior party has wrongfully used the exclusion clause. Our study shows the differences between Swedish and English contract law that can result in difficulties in the harmonisation process. These differences concern the test of reasonableness of exemption clauses, the doctrine of good faith, the legal effects and to what extent the indirect means of control should be applied. The Swedish test of reasonableness may include all relevant circumstances irrespective of the time of their occurrence, before or after the entry of the contract. The courts in England are limited to circumstances that have occurred before the closure of the contract. Section 36 of the Swedish Contracts Act includes a general rule of unfairness applicable to all kinds of contract terms. The rule of unfairness in the UCTA on the other hand, is only applicable to exemption clauses and indemnity clauses and there is no general rule of unfairness in English contract law. Instead the courts rely on indirect means of control, which therefore is of greater importance in English contract law. Finally, adjustments of unfair exemption clauses has a significant role in Swedish contract law, in contrast to English contract law where any adjustment is regarded as an intrusion of the freedom of contract. To endorse one of the most important aims of the EU; a well working inner market, discussions commenced in 2001. The discussions concerned the harmonisation of the contract law within the union. The questions that arose were whether or not it was possible at all to form a European common contract law and if so, what the effects would be. An action plan was developed by the Commission and today both the EU Parliament and the Council are positive in regard to the continuing work with a reference frame. The Commission aims to pass the reference frame in 2009. Since the EU member states are diverse and have different legal systems a harmonisation of the contract law could cause difficulties. There are differences concerning legal traditions and legal values, hence the legal expertise in Europe is divided in the harmonisation question. The following study aims to analyse the existing rules of law in Sweden and England representing two diverse legal systems existing in Europe; civil law and common law. The focus of this study regards the control of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts in both legal systems. The comparison will then be used to analyse the fundamental question if the harmonisation of contract law in the EU is feasible. Specific areas within the contract law have already been harmonised, which shows a possibility to coordinate common law and civil law. Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts is one example of harmonised contract law in the EU and the principles in PECL is another example which shows that it is possible to coordinate common law and civil law. A harmonisation of the contract law will probably promote the commerce within the union and be the next step towards one of the most prominent goals of the EU, namely a well functioning common market. However, our study shows that the differences between national legislation and the differences between the legal traditions within the EU are not insignificant and a harmonisation will probably not be enforced without difficulties.

<p>Inom svensk rätt saknas det lagregler för en situation där ett aktieägaravtal med vitesklausul strider mot ett legalt förbud i ABL. Anledningen till att denna situation blir problematisk är att aktieägaravtalet ses som ett separat rättsförhållande mellan aktieägarna, vilket inte binder bolaget bolagsrättsligt. Att ett aktieägaravtal inte binder aktiebolaget bolagsrättsligt hindrar dock inte aktieägarna från att ingå aktieägaravtal vilka indirekt får samma effekt som om aktiebolaget vore bundet av vad som stadgas i aktieägaravtalet. I små aktiebolag förhåller det sig ofta som så att en aktieägare antingen sitter med i styrelsen eller är verkställande direktör för aktiebolaget. Detta gör att en aktieägare, i egenskap av aktieägare, kan ingå ett aktieägaravtal med en annan aktieägare om exempelvis att denne skall fatta ett specifikt beslut i egenskap av verkställande direktör eller styrelseledamot.</p><p>I ABL finns ett antal legala förbud som stadgar vad ett bolagsorgan får respektive inte får göra. Tanken med ett legalt förbud är att det i form av tvingande lagstiftning förbjuder ett visst handlingssätt som lagstiftaren vill komma till rätta med. Komplikationen då ett aktieägaravtal står i strid med ett legalt förbud i ABL är att ABL:s regler inte är tillämpliga på aktieägaravtalet. Detta gör att aktieägaravtalet kringgår den tvingande lagstiftningen i ABL. För att komma till rätta med detta problem har lagstiftaren överlämnat åt domstolen att i varje enskilt fall där syftet med avtalet är att kringgå den tvingande lagstiftningen pröva om ett sådant avtal skall anses vara giltigt eller ej enligt en allmän rättsgrundsats.</p><p>Denna bedömning skall enligt praxis undersöka det överträda (1) förbudets syfte, (2) konsekvenserna av ogiltighetspåföljden och (3) behovet av ogiltighet som sanktion i det specifika fallet. Genom att använda sig av denna modell kan man komma fram till om ett specifikt legalt förbud i ABL skall anses inneha tillräckligt stort skyddsvärde för att ogiltighetssanktionen skall drabba aktieägaravtalet.</p>

<p>During the later half of the 20th century standard form contracts began to be used more frequently in contract situations. This trend has been consistent and in today’s world numerous commercial parties employ such contracts in their business transactions. The reasons for the extended use of standard form contracts are the benefits that can be obtained for the parties such as time efficiency, effectiveness and price advantages. Standardised contracts often regulate certain issues of the contract for example the way of delivery, remedies and complaints. The definition of such contracts is corresponding in Sweden and England as contracts containing in advance standardised terms with an aim to be used similarly in contract situations with most clients or customers.</p><p>As the usage of standard form contracts increased, the number of unfair contract terms also enhanced. Therefore, the legislative powers in Sweden and England realised that the rules concerning the freedom of contract had to be restricted and governed. As a result, the legislative powers introduced an open control device through statutory control. This was done in Sweden in 1976 with the enforcement of Section 36 of the Contracts Act, and in England the year after when UCTA came into force. The statutory control in both Sweden and England makes it possible to appraise the fairness of exemption clauses. The statutory control is not identical in the two states. UCTA only concerns exclusion clauses and limitation clauses regarding contract terms and non-contractual notices. In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general doctrine of unfairness and Section 36 of the Contracts Act can set aside all kinds of agreements.</p><p>The statutory control is complemented by indirect means of controlling the content of a contract through non statutory methods. The non statutory methods are concerned with the incorporation, interpretation and construction of clauses in a contract. To be valid and for a party to be able to rely on a term it must have been incorporated into the contract. The rules concerning the interpretation of standard form contracts and exclusion clauses are also of great importance. In both states the approach held is that the statutory control should be used preferably over the indirect control means, though the indirect means still has a prominent role in England through common law. Both England and Sweden agree on that the weaker party in a contract situation is in a greater need of protection by the rules of law in unfair contract situations. However unfairness can only arise if the superior party has wrongfully used the exclusion clause.</p><p>Our study shows the differences between Swedish and English contract law that can result in difficulties in the harmonisation process. These differences concern the test of reasonableness of exemption clauses, the doctrine of good faith, the legal effects and to what extent the indirect means of control should be applied. The Swedish test of reasonableness may include all relevant circumstances irrespective of the time of their occurrence, before or after the entry of the contract. The courts in England are limited to circumstances that have occurred before the closure of the contract. Section 36 of the Swedish Contracts Act includes a general rule of unfairness applicable to all kinds of contract terms. The rule of unfairness in the UCTA on the other hand, is only applicable to exemption clauses and indemnity clauses and there is no general rule of unfairness in English contract law. Instead the courts rely on indirect means of control, which therefore is of greater importance in English contract law. Finally, adjustments of unfair exemption clauses has a significant role in Swedish contract law, in contrast to English contract law where any adjustment is regarded as an intrusion of the freedom of contract.</p><p>To endorse one of the most important aims of the EU; a well working inner market, discussions commenced in 2001. The discussions concerned the harmonisation of the contract law within the union. The questions that arose were whether or not it was possible at all to form a European common contract law and if so, what the effects would be. An action plan was developed by the Commission and today both the EU Parliament and the Council are positive in regard to the continuing work with a reference frame. The Commission aims to pass the reference frame in 2009. Since the EU member states are diverse and have different legal systems a harmonisation of the contract law could cause difficulties. There are differences concerning legal traditions and legal values, hence the legal expertise in Europe is divided in the harmonisation question.</p><p>The following study aims to analyse the existing rules of law in Sweden and England representing two diverse legal systems existing in Europe; civil law and common law. The focus of this study regards the control of exclusion clauses in standard form contracts in both legal systems. The comparison will then be used to analyse the fundamental question if the harmonisation of contract law in the EU is feasible. Specific areas within the contract law have already been harmonised, which shows a possibility to coordinate common law and civil law. Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts is one example of harmonised contract law in the EU and the principles in PECL is another example which shows that it is possible to coordinate common law and civil law. A harmonisation of the contract law will probably promote the commerce within the union and be the next step towards one of the most prominent goals of the EU, namely a well functioning common market. However, our study shows that the differences between national legislation and the differences between the legal traditions within the EU are not insignificant and a harmonisation will probably not be enforced without difficulties.</p>

When a company is part of an agreement there is a risk that one of the collaborators pursues similar business and takes up competition with the partner or chooses to reveal information about their partner to other parties. To avoid this, companies establish a confidentiality agreement that prohibits the parties to reveal any information. Confidentiality agreements that are eternal have become more common in Swedish contract law in commercial relations. As a result, disputes between collaborators have occurred regarding the unreasonable length and validity of the agreement at a later stage. When a confidentiality agreement is considered to be unreasonable, 36 § of the Swedish contract law (AvtL) can be applicable. The paragraph deals with the legitimacy and the opportunities of re-adjustment of the unreasonable contract. The question is, can a confidentiality agreement that is eternally valid in commercial relations be modified with the support of 36 § AvtL? Pacta sunt servanda is an important principle in Swedish contract law and the confidentiality agreement is no exception. Hence, the duty of fulfilling a contractual obligation is important. The 36 § of AvtL can be applied when an obligation can be considered to be unreasonable. Confidentiality agreements in commercial relations that are eternal can be seen as unreasonable if a partner is inferior or if later occurred relations changes the meaning of an agreement. If information is considered to be an industrial secret it should be classified according to Act on the Protection of Business Secrets (FHL). However, when the information is not any longer regarded as an industrial secret, it can be unreasonable to have a eternal confidentiality agreement. An example of this can be a patent that expires after a certain period of time. Hence the confidentiality agreement should be able to modify, with the support of 36 § AvtL.

The development of the United Nation’s Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) started at the beginning of the 20th century in order to provide a uniform legal regime for international sales contracts. The development started because of a belief that a uniform international sales convention would contribute certainty in commercial trade and decrease transaction costs for the contracting parties. The Convention was signed in Vienna 1980 and came into force in 1988 after securing the necessary number of ratifications. The CISG is automatically applied to international sale contracts in certain given situations but the contracting parties are free to exclude the Convention as applicable law in favour of another regulation. As of today, more than 25 years after the CISG came into force, the Convention is commonly being excluded as the governing law of international sales contracts. By studying surveys and academic writings, certain factors can be derived as reasons prior to an exclusion of the CISG. The factors can be referred to as unfamiliarity, time and costs, negotiation strength and standard form contracts or standard terms. Regarding unfamiliarity, the importance given to the Convention in law faculties within the signatory states, together with time and costs attributed to a familiarization process, seems to play an important role. Moreover, the Convention is associated with problems regarding a non-uniform interpretation of the Convention’s provisions within the national courts and arbitral tribunals, as well as regarding its incompleteness, meaning that there are gaps that need to be filled by national law. These problems affect the Convention’s ability to provide potential users with legal certainty and predictability, which in turn may affect the familiarity with the Convention and hence have an impact on an exclusion of the CISG.

In a time of rapid development of technologies, new forms of contracting online emerge. Two of these are analyzed in this thesis: click-wrap agreements (where an offer is accepted by way of clicking on an icon “I agree”) and browse-wrap agreements (where the offeree supposedly accepts the offer by browsing on a website, while the terms to the contract are accessible through an inconspicuous hyperlink). Click-wrap agreements are formed, they are accepted in a manner recognized as binding and the offeree knows the terms she assents to. Browse-wrap agreements are generally not formed. Even though the action of browsing on a website could indicate assent, the offeree must know that the act of browsing will be construed as acceptance. But the offeree is generally not made aware of the terms to the contract and thus cannot assent to what she is not aware of. However, if the offeree is in fact aware of the terms to the contract and still knowingly performs the action of browsing, a contract is formed and the offeree is bound. There are some doctrinal problems with an element of an offer – intent to be bound. E-contracting involves a great deal or recklessness by the offerors as well as offerees, leading to the conclusion that the action of clicking “I agree” does not really indicate the intent of the party who performs the act, to actually agree. There is no adequate answer to this problem presently. To sum up, the enforceability of click-wrap contracts is settled in courts, it is a... [to full text] / Besivystant technologijoms keičiasi ir sutarčių sudarymo būdai: dėl mažesnių kaštų ir patogumo populiarėja sutartys elektroninėje erdvėje. Prie to turi prisitaikyti ir teisinė aplinka, todėl šiame magistro darbe yra aptariamos dvi sąlyginai naujos sutarčių sudarymo formos. Viena jų – spragtelėjimu sudaroma sutartis (angl. – click-wrap agreement). Čia oferentas akceptuoja sutarties sąlygas, paspausdamas monitoriaus ekrane ikoną „Sutinku“ ar pan. O situacija, kai sutartis turėtų būti sudaroma naršymu (angl. – browse-wrap agreement) – kiek sudėtingesnė, čia oferentas turėtų išreikšti savo sutikimą vien naršydamas internetinėje svetainėje, tačiau informacija, apie tai, jog naršymas bus laikomas sutikimu galima rasti spragtelėjus ant saito (angl. – hyperlink), kuris neretai būna pateikiamas puslapio apačioje, bet apie nuorodą su sutarties sąlygomis ir akceptavimo būdu oferentas nėra informuojamas, dažnai apie ją net nežino. Šiame darbe spragtelėjimu ir naršymu sudaromos sutartys analizuojamos kaip abstrakčios teisės koncepcijos, aptariamas jų pagrįstumas, tinkamumas. Lietuvos ir Jungtinių Amerikos Valstijų nacionalinės teisės sprendimai darbe aptariami lyginamuoju aspektu. Pirmiausia privalu išsiaiškinti ar galima sudaryti sandorius elektroninėmis (ne tik ryšio) priemonėmis. Nors elektroninėmis ryšio priemonėmis perduodama informacija prilyginama rašytiniams dokumentams (taigi, taip sudaromos sutartys tikrai galioja), spragtelėjimu ar naršymu sudaromų sutarčių atveju, ši teisinė... [toliau žr. visą tekstą]

Chapter 11 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld) and the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) both introduce procedural requirements to the process for creation of land contracts and were both introduced to address a perceived lack of conscience in each of the industries affected. These represent a recent broadening of the ambit of consumer protection legislation in Queensland which deviates from more traditional methods of statutory intervention into land contracts. This paper focuses on the extent to which the Acts effectively introducing a conscience element into certain land contracts, and the extent to which this alters classical contract law. The effectiveness of the approach is then tested against the critiques of two alternative theories of law - law and economics and feminist contract theory - to see whether the legislative approach answers the deficiencies in contract identified within the terms of each theory.

The major problems associated with trade secret law in New Zealand are that it is confused in definition and in jurisdiction. This confusion contributes to the failure of trade secret law in some instances, particularly to protect information created in the emerging biotechnology and computer software industries. This has contributed to alternative forms of protection, notably through copyright for computer programs. From a review of the current law, categories of trade secrets are identified, including sub-patentable and patentable trade secrets. The jurisdictional dispute may be resolved if it is recognised that trade secrets represent a form of property right. To this end, the legal and economic approaches to property rights are synthesised. This synthesis is then extended to create a legal-economic model of the justifications for, and the problems with, the protection of these rights: the intellectual property rights continuum. From this model, it is concluded that some legal protection of trade secrets is justified, provided that equally harmful effects are not created. In particular, sub-patentable trade secrets may warrant greater protection, and patentable trade secrets may be over-protected. One proposal is to punish industrial espionage, although some harmful effects may result. Utility models and laws that protect trade secrets in general are considered and rejected as solutions. Instead, patents of improvement (PI) are proposed which would protect trade secrets that represent an advance on an existing patent. PI would represent a lower standard of inventiveness that is adopted from American biotechnology patent disputes, and so protect sub-patentable trade secrets. The other, higher threshold from the existing English patent law would remain as the patent standard. If a PI were granted to a patent owner, then s/he could practise price discrimination, but if granted to a rival, then competition could result. Either outcome could protect trade secrets, yet mitigate the harmful effects of legal protection. If these proposals were adopted, more information could be produced as well as utilised. Moreover, the growth of the biotechnology and computer software industries in New Zealand could be furthered.