[pt] O Tribunal Europeu de Justiça começou sua trajetória como um tribunal internacional bastante fraco que sofria dos mesmos problemas enfrentados por outras instituições da mesma natureza. Assim, a questão crucial a ser respondida é como o Tribunal foi capaz de alterar os fundamentos do sistema jurídico comunitário, fortalecendo as bases de seu próprio prestígio político. O procedimento de reenvio prejudicial, criado pelo artigo 177 do Tratado de Roma, estabelece um vínculo direto entre os tribunais nacionais e o Tribunal Europeu, atruindo aos primeiros a responsabilidade pela aplicação das decisões do último. Isso siguifica que todas as sanções previstas pelo direito nacional podem ser aplicadas aos julgamentos do Tribunal Comunitário. Devido ao apoio dos tribunais nacionais, a maior ameaça política ao Tribunal Europeu - a ameaça da desobediência - foi em grande medida superada. / [en] The European Court of Justice began as a fairly weak international tribunal, suffering from many of the problems faced by institutions of the same nature. So the crucial question to be answered is how the Court was able to change the foundations of theCommunity legal system, thus strengthening the bases of its own political prestige. The preliminary ruling procedure created by the Article 177 of the Treaty of Rome establishes a direct link between the national courts and the European Court, ascribing to the former the responsibility for the application of the decisions of the latter. lt means that all sanetions available under national law can be applied to the European court judgements.

L’arbitrage est la motivation première de la création de l’Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires (OHADA) pour lutter contre l’insécurité juridique et promouvoir son développement. Cet arbitrage s’inspire des règles matérielles de l’arbitrage international qui accorde une importance particulière à la volonté des parties.L’arbitrage dans l’espace OHADA est régi par le Traité, un acte uniforme et le règlement d’arbitrage de la Cour Commune de Justice et d’Arbitrage(C.C.J.A).Le droit de l’arbitrage a certes amélioré le cadre normatif surtout dans les pays qui n’en disposaient pas, mais au bout de plus d’une décennie d’existence, cet arbitrage est confronté à de nombreuses difficultés d’application. Ces difficultés proviennent de ces acteurs (parties, arbitres et juge national).Ainsi, notre réflexion vise à analyser les difficultés d’application à partir du contentieux arbitral et à proposer des mesures susceptibles d’améliorer le droit et la pratique de l’arbitrage. / Firstly, arbitration should be a primary motivator for the creation of the Oganization for Harmonization of Business Law in Africa to fight against the legal insecurity and promote development. This arbitration taites it’s inspiration from rules of international arbitration which gives a particular importance to the will of the parties. The arbitration in the OHADA zone is governed by its Treaty and an uniform act as well as the rules of arbitration of the common Court of justice and Arbitration(CCJA).The Law of arbitartion has certainly improved the legal framework especially in the countries which do not have it. However, after several years of existance. this arbitration is confronted with several difficulties of application. This difficulties originated from its its various parties i.e. Therefore, our reflection aims at analysing the difficulties of application which originates from the arbitration dispute and to propose measures which could improve the Law and the practice of Arbitration.

The establishment of the East African Community (EAC) in 1999 brought with it new expectations for the citizens of the East African region. The main objective of the EAC is to bolster development in various fields such as economic, social, cultural, research, technology and legal affairs. In order to reach such an objective, the EAC member states have pledged to adhere to human rights, as one of the founding principles of the EAC. Member states are also required to respect accepted universal human rights standards when carrying out Community activities. In order to ensure that EAC values, as provided in the EAC Treaty, are preserved, member states voluntarily decided to put in place a judicial organ for the Community − the East African Court of Justice (EACJ). The Court is the main judicial organ of the EAC, with the primary responsibility for interpreting and applying EAC law. Despite the fact that human rights constitute one of the EAC norms, the EACJ has yet to be granted an explicit human rights jurisdiction. It has thus fallen on the Court to engage in judicial activism to indirectly protect human rights within the Community. Thus, this study examines the role of the EACJ in protecting human rights within the EAC, as well as the challenges it is facing at present and its prospects. This study, therefore, demonstrates that the current limitation on the human rights jurisdiction of the EACJ has rendered the Court unable to protect human rights effectively within the EAC. / Thesis (LLD)--University of Pretoria, 2014. / tm2015 / Centre for Human Rights / LLD / Unrestricted

No abstract available. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / gm2014 / Centre for Human Rights / UPonly

No abstract available. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / gm2014 / Centre for Human Rights / unrestricted

No description available.

The Court of justice of the European Union as an Administrative Court The aim of this thesis is to analyse the role of the Court of Justice of the EU as an administrative court with respect to the defined characteristics of administrative justice. The issue of administrative justice at the EU level is defined in relation to individuals (natural or legal persons) as non-privileged applicants. The first introductory chapter defines theoretical concepts and specifications of administrative justice which are necessary for further analysis. After a short introduction, the second chapter is focused on the analysis of the historical development and ongoing reforms of the Court of Justice of the EU in relation to its function as administrative court (institutional aspect), while identifying the French administrative justice model as a key inspiration for the initial model of judicial review. The issues of the ongoing reforms are important not only to describe the development of the Court of Justice as an administrative court, but can also serve as an inspiration for solving current problems of national administrative courts. The third chapter deals with the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of EU with regard to proceedings initiated by individuals' actions (material aspect). Furthermore, actions for...

1 Current Issues of Supplementary Protection Certificates for Medicinal Products in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice Abstract Supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) are a sui generis industrial property right. Under the conditions, which are explained in more detail in this thesis, they can be obtained for the active ingridients of certain products. The type of products eligible for SPC protection are, inter alia, medicinal products which are characterized by their social importance and therefore by the need to ensure their safety, efficacy and quality. Given that the process of providing these guarantees is both costly and time consuming and that the commercialization of the product is conditional on such guarantees, the period for which medicinal products can benefit from patent protection is therefore shortened. The aim of the SPCs is to compensate for this shortening by an additional period of protection in order to incentivise research that has a positive effect on human health and quality of life. This work analyzes the evolution of the case law of the Court of Justice with regard to an interpretative shift or clarification, in particular as regards the substantive conditions for obtaining a certificate and provisions pertaining to the term of the SPC as laid down in the SPC...

No description available.

No / This chapter examines the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which consists of three courts: the Court of Justice (or ‘the Court’), the General Court, and the Civil Service Tribunal. It focuses on issues of structure and procedure, the extent of the Courts’ jurisdiction, and their role in the promotion of European integration. The chapter also discusses the criticism directed at the CJEU for the way it exercises its judicial powers, which allegedly involve political considerations normally unacceptable for a judicial body. Lastly, the chapter looks at the main challenges facing the courts.