No description available.

WTO政府採購協定（Agreement on Government Procurement, GPA）之談判進展深受各界關注，依據GPA第24條第7項(b)(c)款之規定，各會員自1997年展開內建談判，其中包括協定文字之修正與市場開放談判兩大層面。本文以市場開放談判為主要觀察面向，透過談判資料之整理，發現自2004年談判正式展開以來，會員之間針對談判定位與方向始終難以凝聚共識，使整體談判停滯不前；此外，本文以美國與加拿大為個案，分析其在談判過程提出之要求與回應清單，發現其新增適用GPA之內容相當有限，佐證談判停滯之現象。本文認為談判裹足不前的原因可能有三方面，分別是政府採購協定之談判利益與其他WTO協定之優惠無法互換、GPA會員未開放足夠誘因之新市場、各會員普遍受到保護產業政策與政治因素之掣肘。 今（2010）年2月份，美國與加拿大雙方簽署政府採購協定，互惠開放部分政府採購市場納入協定適用範圍內，使WTO秘書長與許多會員期盼其對整體談判動能有所助益。本文檢視該協定後認為其對GPA市場開放談判可能無法產生實質幫助，不過其所彰顯之指標性意義卻不容忽視。市場開放談判以達成多邊化為目標之一，然而面對談判之阻礙，本文最後提出鼓勵會員重行推動透明化協定之談判，或許對於達成GPA的多邊化仍有其價值。 / The “built in” negotiation of the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), pursuant to Article XXIV:7 (b) & (c) of the GPA, includes two folds of negotiations: amendment of the text of the GPA and market access negotiation/coverage negotiation. This thesis mainly observes market access negotiation and concludes from relevant material that it is stalled due to absent consensus among members of the GPA on goals and directions of the negotiation. The thesis further demonstrates the impasse of the negotiation from limited expansion of coverage committed by the United States of America and Canada under the GPA. The thesis suggests three reasons behind the stalled market access negotiation: the coverage committed under the GPA cannot exchange for concessions under other WTO agreements; no substantial coverage has been expanded by existing members to motivate overall expansion of the GPA; the burden of protective industry policies and associated political pressures within each members of the GPA. The Unites States and Canada has concluded an Agreement on Government Procurement earlier this year (2010) in which it allows further expansion of coverage under the GPA on a reciprocal basis. After the conclusion of such Agreement, several members of the GPA and the Director-General of the WTO welcomed such development and expected new momentum of the negotiation shall be aroused. However, in view of the coverage committed in the Agreement, the thesis suggests it could be of little help to the negotiation in a substantial way, but the emblematic effect it might have on other members of the GPA is still worth noticing. In light of the current situation, the thesis finally provides that there might be merit to encourage members of the GPA to re-negotiate Transparency Agreement on Government Procurement in order to multilateralize the GPA.

No description available.

La loi n° 2013-404 du 17 mai 2013 ouvrant le mariage aux couples de personnes de même sexe constitue un tournant pour le droit de la famille en France. Cette loi, qualifiée parfois véritable tsunami est l’aboutissement de la prise en considération des revendications des homosexuels à constituer une famille. Avant 2013 le droit français ne permet pas au couple homosexuel de constituer une famille homoparentale : il n’autorise pas le mariage entre personnes de même sexe. De plus, la PMA est réservée aux seuls couples hétérosexuels et la GPA est totalement interdite en France. Ce consensus en apparence figé sur la non-reconnaissance de la famille homosexuelle est conforté par le droit européen, en particulier la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme dont la jurisprudence marque encore peu de signes d’évolution. Pourtant, dès 2008, la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme se prononce avec l’arrêt E.B c/ France sur la question de l’adoption par un célibataire homosexuel, opérant un revirement en nette rupture avec sa jurisprudence antérieure Fretté c/ France. Cette évolution jurisprudentielle de la CEDH s’inscrit dans un mouvement plus vaste des droits nationaux vers la reconnaissance de la famille homosexuelle. Pour autant, après 2013, des questions restent en attente, en particulier pour la PMA et la GPA. La constitution de la famille homosexuelle n’est pas encore achevée. / The 2013-404 law of 17 May 2013 which opened up the possibility for people of the same gender to get married shows a turning point for the family rights in France. This law, sometimes described as a real tsunami, is the outcome of taking into account the homosexuals' claim for starting a family. Before 2013 the French right did not allow a homosexual couple to be a homoparental family. It did not authorize people of the same gender to get married. Moreover Assisted Reproduction is only reserved to heterosexual couples and Gestation for Others is strictly forbidden in France. This seemingly constrained consensus on the non-legal recognition of the homosexual family is reinforced by the European right, particularly the European Court of Human Rights whose precedents still show few signs of evolution. Yet, from 2008 the European Court of Human Rights gave a verdict with the 'EB against France' decision on the question of child adoption by a homosexual person ; it implements a major change and marks a break with its prior 'Fretté against France' precedent. This jurisprudential evolution of the EC of HR is part of a larger movement of national rights towards the recognition of the homosexual family. For all that,some questions have been on hold since 2013, particularly for the Assisted Reproduction and the Gestation for Others. The composition of the homosexual family has not yet reached the end.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

La notion de filiation renvoie au lien familial entre un parent et un enfant, lien qui ancre l'individu dans une lignée généalogique et permet de l'identifier par rapport aux membres de sa famille. Notion universelle, il a semblé pertinent d'examiner comment deux systèmes juridiques distincts, tels que ceux de droit civil et de common law, l'appréhendaient. Évoquant intuitivement un lien génétique entre le parent et l'enfant, la notion de filiation pourrait se réduire à cette dimension purement physique. Pourtant, le droit tient compte du fait qu'elle recouvre d'autres réalités, sociales et affectives, révélant ainsi une notion plus complexe. Entre la réalité génétique, devenue accessible grâce aux progrès de la science, et la volonté, employée pour fonder toutes les fictions juridiques telles que l'adoption, la procréation médicalement assistée et la gestation pour autrui, une tension est née. Le droit s'efforce de trouver un équilibre entre ces fondements grâce à la nouvelle« boussole » qu'est l'intérêt de l'enfant ainsi que grâce au cadre éprouvé de l'ordre public. L'étude comparée des droits français et anglais a permis également d'observer une dissociation croissante entre la notion et son régime, le régime pouvant être attribué indépendamment de l'existence juridique du lien. Cette dissociation en a révélé une autre, aux contours plus précis encore, entre le statut, c'est-à-dire le lien de droit initial auquel est attaché le régime, et le rôle, c'est-à-dire le comportement de fait qui se verra attribuer tout ou partie du régime de la filiation. C'est ensuite autour de l'exercice effectif de ce rôle que se réagrège une grande partie des effets de la filiation, interrogeant par conséquent la notion sur sa capacité à rendre compte des évolutions du droit de la famille. / The notion of “filiation” refers to the family relationship between a parent and a child, which place each on ein a family lineage and identify him from the members of his family. Because of its universality, it seemed appropriate to examine how two different legal systems, such as those of civil law and common law , understood it. Referring intuitively to a genetic link between parent and child, the notion of “filiation” could be, at first sight, reduced to a physical aspect. However, the law recognizes that it covers other realities like social and emotional ones. Thus, it reveals a more complex concept. In recent years, a tension appeared between genetic reality, which became available thanks to advances in science, and will, used to base alllegal fictions such as adoption, assisted reproduction and surrogacy. The law seeks to check and balancethese foundations with the child's welfare and public policy.The comparative study of French and English law also revealed a growing dissociation between the notion and its effects. Indeed, the effects can be assigned independently of the legal existence of the link. This dissociation has revealed a more precise one between the status, that is to say the initial link which isattached the effects, and the role, that is to say, the behavior which will receive all or part of the effects of filiation. Then, the effective exercise of this role can re-aggregate the effects of filiation. Thus, it is questioning the notion on its ability to account for changes in the family law .

No description available.