El presente informe tiene por finalidad explicar los fundamentos de hecho y de derecho del expediente de derecho privado N° 16824-2010-0-1801-JR-CI-15, el mismo que versa sobre la materia de nulidad de acto jurídico. En este proceso judicial, la demandante pretende que se declare la nulidad de tres actos jurídicos realizados por su hija, al amparo de un poder de representación. En ese sentido, se describirán los fundamentos de la demanda y contestación de demanda, así como las decisiones que tomaron los jueces al expedir la sentencia de primera, segunda instancia y en el recurso de casación. Finalmente, se describirá el marco normativo y conceptual, desarrollando un análisis sobre los fundamentos de hecho y de derecho, apoyado en algunos apuntes doctrinarios y jurisprudencia sobre esta materia. / Trabajo de suficiencia profesional

OPSOMMING Alhoewel die trustfiguur reeds sedert die 19e Eeu in Suid-Afrika erken word, en as `n suiwer trustfiguur tipeer kan word, is die hantering van die regte van sekere trustbegunstigdes steeds in onsekerheid gehul. Die hoofrede hiervoor is die oorbeklemtoning van die wyse waarop trusts tot stand kom en die onderbeklemtoning van die unieke fidusiêre aard van die trust na oprigting daarvan. In Engeland, Skotland, Sri Lanka, Louisiana en Quebec, waar die suiwer trustfiguur ook aanwending vind, bestaan, in teenstelling met die oënskynlike regsposisie in Suid-Afrika, die moontlikheid van trustbegunstigdes sonder regte glad nie. In hierdie jurisdiksies speel die oprigtingsinstrument `n ondergeskikte rol en ontstaan die regte van trustbegunstigdes ex lege uit hoofde van die trustfiguur as `n vertrouensverhouding sui generis. Alhoewel die Suid-Afrikaanse trustreg die fidusiêre aard van die verhouding tussen trustee en trustbegunstigde erken, word die aard en omvang van die regte wat hieruit voort behoort te vloei nog nie voldoende deur die howe erken nie. Vertrouensverhoudinge waaruit regte en verpligtinge ex lege voortspruit, is bekend aan die gemenereg en word steeds hedendaags aangetref in verskeie ander vakdissiplines binne die Suid-Afrikaanse reg, waaronder die maatskappyereg. Die suiwer trustfiguur stel verder noodwendig `n vertrouensverhouding daar wat juis daarop gemik is om die regte van trustbegunstigdes te beskerm. Die standpunt word dus ingeneem dat alle trustbegunstigdes in Suid-Afrika derhalwe oor ex lege regte beskik. Daar word aan die hand gedoen dat trustbegunstigdes se regte nie uitsluitlik voortvloei uit hoofde van die tersaaklike oprigtingshandeling nie, maar dat unieke regte ontstaan as gevolg van die onderliggende fidusiêre verhouding wat tot stand kom wanneer, maar ongeag hoe, die trust opgerig word. Kortom: Die fidusiêre verhouding behoort erken te word as eie, onafhanklike bron van trustbegunstigdes se moontlike regte teen die trustee in die geval van trustbreuk. Nie net is dit `n logiese stap in die ontwikkeling van die gemenereg nie, maar sal dit ook die beskerming van trustbegunstigdes in die Suid-Afrikaanse trustreg op dieselfde voet plaas as trustbegunstigdes in die ander jurisdiksies wat nagevors is. So 'n stap sal bydra tot regsekerheid en nie tot `n wesentlike omwenteling in die Suid-Afrikaanse trustreg en -administrasie lei nie. SYNOPSIS Although the trust figure has been recognised in South Africa since the 19th century and can be characterised as a proper trust, uncertainty still prevails regarding the scope and acknowledgement of the rights of some trust beneficiaries. The main reason for this is the over-emphasis of the manner in which trusts are created, and the under-emphasis of the unique fiduciary nature of the trust once it has been established. In England, Scotland, Sri Lanka, Louisiana and Quebec where the proper trust figure is also applied, there is no possibility, contrary to the apparent legal position in South Africa, of trust beneficiaries without rights. In these jurisdictions the instrument used to create a trust plays a subordinate role and the rights of trust beneficiaries originate ex lege by virtue of the trust itself as a relationship of trust sui generis. Although South African trust law acknowledges the fiduciary nature of the relationship between trustee and trust beneficiary, the nature and extent of the rights that should emanate from this relationship are not adequately acknowledged by the courts. / Jurisprudence / L.L.D.

This master dissertation (diploma) is committed to inheritance, inheritance law and inheritance with a focus on properties and also inheritance with international subject in the inheritance procedure. The goal of this work is to give sufficient information so that even the uninformed reader will know what is associated with inheritance, what are the basic terms from this area of law and also the questions of inheritance's inter-family relations because inheritance will be a subject everyone deals with eventually. The subject of this dissertation is inheritance throughout history to its current legal regulation. At the same time it is also mentioned inheritance as a change of ownership law and concepts that are related with this part of civil law. In the introduction is explained the terms of inheritance and inheritance law are explained with the view to the history of Roman law and to the Middle Ages. Next is an explanation of the basic law terms through to our current law regulation. There is also a focus on inheritance procedures including the change of the ownership rights and then will be the process of the registration of the ownership right to the real estate cadastre. With this topic is also connected a possibility of inheritance procedure with properties. At the end this work is included practices of case with international subject in the inheritance procedure. Because of the focus on the inheritance of properties, the last chapter is about the valuation of properties in the course of the inheritance procedure.

OPSOMMING Alhoewel die trustfiguur reeds sedert die 19e Eeu in Suid-Afrika erken word, en as `n suiwer trustfiguur tipeer kan word, is die hantering van die regte van sekere trustbegunstigdes steeds in onsekerheid gehul. Die hoofrede hiervoor is die oorbeklemtoning van die wyse waarop trusts tot stand kom en die onderbeklemtoning van die unieke fidusiêre aard van die trust na oprigting daarvan. In Engeland, Skotland, Sri Lanka, Louisiana en Quebec, waar die suiwer trustfiguur ook aanwending vind, bestaan, in teenstelling met die oënskynlike regsposisie in Suid-Afrika, die moontlikheid van trustbegunstigdes sonder regte glad nie. In hierdie jurisdiksies speel die oprigtingsinstrument `n ondergeskikte rol en ontstaan die regte van trustbegunstigdes ex lege uit hoofde van die trustfiguur as `n vertrouensverhouding sui generis. Alhoewel die Suid-Afrikaanse trustreg die fidusiêre aard van die verhouding tussen trustee en trustbegunstigde erken, word die aard en omvang van die regte wat hieruit voort behoort te vloei nog nie voldoende deur die howe erken nie. Vertrouensverhoudinge waaruit regte en verpligtinge ex lege voortspruit, is bekend aan die gemenereg en word steeds hedendaags aangetref in verskeie ander vakdissiplines binne die Suid-Afrikaanse reg, waaronder die maatskappyereg. Die suiwer trustfiguur stel verder noodwendig `n vertrouensverhouding daar wat juis daarop gemik is om die regte van trustbegunstigdes te beskerm. Die standpunt word dus ingeneem dat alle trustbegunstigdes in Suid-Afrika derhalwe oor ex lege regte beskik. Daar word aan die hand gedoen dat trustbegunstigdes se regte nie uitsluitlik voortvloei uit hoofde van die tersaaklike oprigtingshandeling nie, maar dat unieke regte ontstaan as gevolg van die onderliggende fidusiêre verhouding wat tot stand kom wanneer, maar ongeag hoe, die trust opgerig word. Kortom: Die fidusiêre verhouding behoort erken te word as eie, onafhanklike bron van trustbegunstigdes se moontlike regte teen die trustee in die geval van trustbreuk. Nie net is dit `n logiese stap in die ontwikkeling van die gemenereg nie, maar sal dit ook die beskerming van trustbegunstigdes in die Suid-Afrikaanse trustreg op dieselfde voet plaas as trustbegunstigdes in die ander jurisdiksies wat nagevors is. So 'n stap sal bydra tot regsekerheid en nie tot `n wesentlike omwenteling in die Suid-Afrikaanse trustreg en -administrasie lei nie. SYNOPSIS Although the trust figure has been recognised in South Africa since the 19th century and can be characterised as a proper trust, uncertainty still prevails regarding the scope and acknowledgement of the rights of some trust beneficiaries. The main reason for this is the over-emphasis of the manner in which trusts are created, and the under-emphasis of the unique fiduciary nature of the trust once it has been established. In England, Scotland, Sri Lanka, Louisiana and Quebec where the proper trust figure is also applied, there is no possibility, contrary to the apparent legal position in South Africa, of trust beneficiaries without rights. In these jurisdictions the instrument used to create a trust plays a subordinate role and the rights of trust beneficiaries originate ex lege by virtue of the trust itself as a relationship of trust sui generis. Although South African trust law acknowledges the fiduciary nature of the relationship between trustee and trust beneficiary, the nature and extent of the rights that should emanate from this relationship are not adequately acknowledged by the courts. / Jurisprudence / L.L.D.

Land is a finite resource for sustainable livelihoods of the general population and the foundation of South Africa’s diverse culture. However, throughout our South African history, the land question has been a contentious, sensitive and emotive issue ever since the inception of the colonial era, thus the democratic dispensation views the Land Reform Programme as a panacea to the historical inequalities with regard to land ownership, distribution and forced removals, as well as viewing it as a tool to achieve socio-economic and political stability. Since globally, land reform arose mainly because of inequalities of resources or to control resources,the overall view in South Africa is that land ownership can be optimally utilised for redistribution, reform, effective administration and for developmental purposes; and, as a result, change in land ownership, use and control has become imperative. This study seeks to evaluate the democratic government’s intervention and the efficacy of the urban tenure reform programme in dealing with unequal and racial ownership of urban land in the old(pre 1994) former Black urban settlements such SOWETO, by investigating legislation and policy related to land ownership, and the current tenure and ownership system and status in both Zola and Orlando.Document analysis is a form of qualitative research used by the researcher to provide voice and meaning around an assessed researched topic, and findings further reveal the challenges faced in the implementation or execution phaseof the urban tenure remedial programme, and the current status and the remedial programme benefits, while recommendations are made in terms of systems and processes in order to accelerate service delivery, and with the emphasis of the importance of capacity building for stakeholders, including the benefiting community. misperception that the Land Reform Programme only relates to the “rural” areas and “the transfer of agricultural land from dissertation investigates the evolution of land tenure or ownership rights in the former black urban human settlements, looking at the discriminatory laws and policies of the past, consequent political resistance and other milestones as well as the democratic government’s interventions in this regard whites to ... / Public Administration / M. P. A.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:30:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodolpho Vannucci.pdf: 954127 bytes, checksum: 3d09fa233c7024077f2e127169c9b53c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-05-28 / The purpose of this study is to analyze the execution of alimony in Family Law, through an organized and current view of the institute. The co-existence of several law provisions which rule or affect the execution of alimony justifies the necessity of this study, to put in order the provisions in a way that all of them are made usefull to grant the execution being as effective as possible. Another justification is the arising, over the last years, of legal renovation, as well as the promulgation of new legal Statutes, making necessary a review of the concepts regarding the topic. Every hypothesis of the execution of alimony in Family Law is analyzed, investigating its singularities and controversies, always searching for a systematic coherency and for the effectiveness of the process. The method used is the doctrinal and jurisprudential research, constantly investigating the set of problems, using, when possible and relevant, data from judicial practice. Such method allows the study to reach its purpose, giving a current and systematic view of the execution on alimony / O objetivo deste trabalho é analisar a execução dos alimentos decorrentes do direito de família, com uma visão atualizada e ordenada. Justifica a necessidade deste estudo a coexistência de inúmeros dispositivos legais que regulam ou afetam a execução de alimentos, o que impõe uma organização destes dispositivos que torne todos úteis e os faça servir para que a execução seja a mais efetiva possível. Outra justificativa é o surgimento, nos últimos anos, de inúmeras reformas legislativas, bem como a edição de novos diplomas legais, tornando necessária uma revisão de conceitos que cercam o tema. Serão analisadas todas as hipóteses de execução de alimentos decorrentes do direito de família, observando-se suas peculiaridades e seus pontos polêmicos, sempre na busca de uma coerência sistemática e da efetividade ao processo. O método utilizado foi a pesquisa doutrinária e jurisprudencial, com a constante busca pela problematização, utilizando-se, sempre que possível e pertinente, de dados da prática forense. Tal método permitiu ao estudo atingir seu objetivo, fornecendo uma visão sistemática e atual da execução de alimentos

Le pacte d’actionnaires se place dans une forme de dépendance unilatérale au contrat de société qui n’est pas sans rappeler le rapport juridique d’accessoire à principal.En effet, s’il est fondamentalement distinct du contrat de société qu’il complète, tout pacte conclu par certains actionnaires, en dehors des statuts, afin d’organiser leurs relations interindividuelles d’actionnaires, trouve nécessairement sa matière et puise sa raison d’être dans le pacte social. Ainsi, la dépendance du pacte au contrat de société se manifeste-t-elle, de la manière la plus évidente, par la caducité qu’entraîne pour le pacte l’arrivée du terme du contrat de société ou la perte de la qualité d’actionnaire d’un partenaire.Dès lors, par analogie avec la règle selon laquelle l’accessoire a vocation à suivre le sort du principal, cette dimension d’accessoire du contrat de société justifie que le pacte subisse l’influence du cadre juridique auquel le contrat de société est lui-même soumis, à savoir le droit des sociétés et, en particulier, l’ordre public sociétaire.Cette dépendance au contrat de société, par essence commune à tous les pactes d’actionnaires en raison de leur objet matériel et de leur cause, est à géométrie variable. Elle repose en effet sur divers facteurs de rattachement au contrat de société que sont l’exercice du droit de vote, la détention des actions ou la qualité d’actionnaire des partenaires, lesquels impriment, selon qu’ils s’immiscent plus ou moins profondément dans le fondement, la structure ou encore le fonctionnement de la société, différents degrés de dépendance dans la relation pacte - contrat de société.Malgré l’hétérogénéité du régime des pactes d’actionnaires, il est alors possible de dégager,à l’aune de cette dimension d’accessoire, une tendance fondamentale qui anime, en droit positif, la jurisprudence relative aux pactes. Cette ligne directrice réside dans la variabilité du degré d’emprise des règles qui encadrent le contrat de société sur le régime des pactes d’actionnaires.La jurisprudence se révèle être, en effet, d’une manière générale et par-delà la casuistique, en cohérence avec cette influence proportionnelle de l’environnement sociétaire à l’intensité du degré de dépendance que présente chaque type de pacte en fonction du facteur qui le rattache au contrat de société. Les pactes caractérisés par une dépendance marquée au contrat de société bénéficient ainsi d’une marge de liberté à la mesure de celle dont bénéficie le contrat de société pour l’aménagement de l’exercice du droit de vote ou de la perte de la qualité d’actionnaire. Au contraire, les pactes caractérisés par une dépendance modérée au contrat de société, qui organisent des cessions ou des acquisitions d’actions,sont plus largement libérés des contraintes auxquelles est soumis le contrat de société au regard du principe de libre négociabilité des actions. Quant à l’influence sur les pactes de certains autres principes d’ordre public sociétaire, tels que la prohibition des clauses léonines ou l’expertise de l’article 1843-4 du Code civil, elle demeure incertaine en droit positif. Toutefois, la jurisprudence tend à reconnaître le particularisme de ces règles et à leur retirer, en conséquence, tout caractère impératif en dehors du cadre des relations entretenues collectivement par les actionnaires avec la société. / Shareholders’ agreement falls into a form of unilateral dependence to the companyagreement that is reminiscent of the legal relationship between the incidental and itsprincipal.Indeed, although it is fundamentally separate from the company agreement, which itsupplements, any agreement concluded by certain shareholders apart from the articles ofassociation, in order to organise their inter-individual shareholders relationships, is,nevertheless, necessarily based on and permitted by the company agreement. Thus, thecontractual dependency of the shareholders’ agreement to the company agreementmanifests itself, in the most obvious way, through the obsoleteness of the shareholders’agreement caused by the termination of the company agreement or by the loss ofshareholder status by a partner.Therefore, by analogy with the rule according to which the incidental is inclined to yield to theprincipal, such kinship to the quality of accessory to the company agreement justifies the factthat the shareholders’ agreement would be under the influence of the legal framework towhich the company’s memorandum and articles of association are submitted, that is to saycorporate law and, in particular, corporate law and order.This dependence to the company agreement, which is in essence common to allshareholders’ agreements due to their material object and cause, turns out to be flexible. Itrests indeed on different connecting factors to the company agreement, such as using thevoting right, shareholding or shareholder status of partners, which imprint, according to howdeep they work into the company foundation, structure or functioning, different degrees ofdependence in the relationship between the shareholders’ agreement and the companyagreement.In spite of the heterogenic regime of the shareholders’ agreements, it is possible to outline, inrespect to this type of accessory status to the company agreement, a crucial tendency thatleads, in positive law, agreements-related case law. This guideline lies in the variability of thehold on shareholders’ agreements regime by the rules that frame the company’smemorandum and articles of association.Indeed, case law proves to be, generally speaking and beyond casuistry, consistentwith this proportional influence of the company environment to the degree of dependenceeach type of shareholders’ agreement is subject to, according to the factor connecting it tothe company agreement. The shareholders’ agreements that show a strong dependence tothe company agreement are given a leeway commensurate with the one the company’smemorandum and articles of association benefit from regarding voting right or loss ofshareholder status arrangements. By contrast, the moderately dependant shareholders’agreements, organising transfer or acquisition of shares, are more widely released from therestrictions that govern the company’s articles of association regarding the principle of freetransferability of shares. Furthermore, the influence on shareholders’ agreements of someother principles of corporate law and order, such as the leonine clause prohibition or theexpertise of Article 1843-4 of the French Civil Code, remain uncertain in positive law.However, case law tends to recognize the distinctive identity of these rules and,consequently, to clear them from any imperative property beyond the frame of therelationships that the shareholders have collectively with the company.