La résolution des litiges est couramment considérée comme une fonction exclusivement juridictionnelle. Les recours portés devant les juridictions sont appelés recours contentieux et la procédure juridictionnelle serait la procédure contentieuse. Devant l’administration, la procédure serait non contentieuse et les recours seraient des pétitions gracieuses. Or, tant l’administration française que l’administration colombienne tranchent quotidiennement des litiges dans l’exercice d’une fonction contentieuse qui n’est pas nouvelle. Dès lors, l’exclusivité juridictionnelle du contentieux n’est qu’une vision déformée de l’organisation du pouvoir. La résolution administrative des litiges est l’une des prérogatives de puissance publique dont dispose l’administration. Elle se caractérise par son caractère accessoire de la mission administrative principale; il s’agit d’un instrument de la réalisation des finalités de l’action administrative. L’administration tranche les litiges dans l’exercice de sa fonction administrative : les décisions administratives contentieuses n’ont pas force de chose jugée, pouvant être l’objet du contrôle juridictionnel qui décidera définitivement le litige. Cette fonction administrative est conforme à la théorie de la séparation des pouvoirs dont l’interprétation séparatiste ne se réalise ni en France ni en Colombie. Cependant, l’administration n’exerce pas sa fonction contentieuse à chaque fois qu’un recours administratif est exercé, qu’une procédure de sanction administrative est entamée ou qu’un litige opposant deux particuliers est porté à la décision de l’administration. L’activité contentieuse de l’administration exige qu’un véritable contentieux soit présenté à l’administration, que ce contentieux se matérialise devant l’administration et qu’elle tranche unilatéralement le fond du litige. Dans ce cas, l’administration n’exerce une fonction ni matériellement juridictionnelle ni quasi contentieuse, mais une véritable fonction contentieuse. / Dispute resolution activity is commonly considered as a wholly judicial function. Judicial actions against the administration and the procedure followed by Courts would be referred as “contentious”, while actions and procedures before administrative bodies would be described as “non-contentious”. Still, both Colombian and French administrations may resolve disputes on a daily basis as a result of longstanding “contentious” missions. Therefore, a vision that reduces this “contentious” to the solely judicial activity distorts this reality in power organization theory. The administrative resolution of disputes is an incidental prerogative of the public administration. It is characterized by its attachment to the main administrative mission, it is an instrument for the purposes of administrative action. The administration resolves disputes as part of its administrative function: administrative “contentious” decisions have not the force of a final judgment, and could be subject to judicial review. Administrative “contentious” missions seem to conform to a non-rigid vision of the separation of powers shared by Colombian and French systems. However, the administration does not performs a “contentious” activity every time an administrative action or an administrative sanction procedure is undertaken, or when it has to decide a controversy opposing two individuals. Administrative “contentious” activity demands a real “contentious” to be materialized before the administration, which also decides the bottom of the dispute. In that case, the administration does not perform a judicial or quasi-judicial mission, but just a real “contentious” mission

Le prolongement du processus de communautarisation va certes avoir des conséquences sur le plan extérieur de l'Union européenne. La reconnaissance des décisions tierces par le juge français sera désormais influencée par l’application des principes et valeurs européens. La présente étude mettra l'accent sur le sort des conditions exigées, en France, pour les décisions tierces. Le rôle du juge d'exéquatur sera déterminant pour illustrer la transition de la pratique juridictionnelle. En effet, c'est le pouvoir de celui-ci qui va déterminer le sort de cette pratique envers les décisions émanant des États tiers. Outre les conventions élaborées dans le cadre européen, la convention de Bruxelles du 27 septembre de 1968 et le règlement européen n° 44/2001, ainsi que le règlement Bruxelles II, Bruxelles II bis et les accords de partenariat, ne seront pas à l'abri de notre recherche. Autrement dit, nous voulons mesurer le développement du droit international privé européen, notamment en termes d'entraide judiciaire, sur le plan extérieur. Le but est de donner au droit européen une dimension universelle. / The extension process of communitarisation will certainly have implications outside the European Union. Recognition of third decisions by the French judge will now be influenced by the application of European principles and values. This study will focus on the fate of the conditions required in France for the third decisions. The role of the judge will determine exequatur to illustrate the transition from legal practice. Indeed, it is the power of it will determine the fate of this practice to decisions from other States. In addition to the conventions developed in the European context, the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 and this Regulation No. 44/2001 (also Brussels II and Brussels II bis) and the partnership agreements, will not be immune to our research. In other words, we want to measure the development of European private international law, particularly in terms of mutual legal assistance on the outside. The goal is to give the European international private law a universal dimension.

The diploma thesis on Arbitration procedure within international business transactions focuses on the place of arbitration procedure and its relation to the national system of law. The first chapter is concerned with the dispute resolutions within international business transactions. The thesis characterises the alternative dispute resolutions and defines the term of arbitration procedure within international business transactions. The basic characteristics thereof are specified and the theories which attempt to explain nature of arbitration are described - contractual, jurisdictional, mixed and autonomy theory. The term of the place of arbitration is defined in the second chapter as the real place situated in the territory of a particular state. This place is distinguished from the arbitration seat and from other terms which used to be confused with the place of arbitration. The arbitration seat is deemed to represent legal domicile of the arbitration. The system of law of the seat determines the legal regime of arbitration procedure. The thesis further describes two main theories dealing with the relation between the place of arbitration and the national system of law - seat theory and delocalization theory. The relation between the place of arbitration and the national system of law is also...

L'expropriation pour cause d'utilité publique s'inscrit dans une injonction paradoxale. Le droit de propriété est un des droits fondamentaux de la personne qui doit, cependant, s'adapter aux nécessités des politiques d'aménagement du territoire et d'urbanisme dictées par l'évolution de la société. Les textes constitutionnels, législatifs et réglementaires, tout comme les textes supranationaux et notamment européens, garantissent le droit de propriété. Toutefois, les garanties textuelles se caractérisent par leur stabilité, alors que la jurisprudence est, par essence, le reflet de l'évolution de la société. Il revient au juge de prendre en compte, par son appréciation souveraine des faits, le fait que l'expropriation soit devenue une technique d'aménagement à part entière. Il convient alors de distinguer l'apport des juges administratif, judiciaire et européen qui contribuent chacun, de manière directe ou indirecte et à des degrés différents, à la protection du droit de propriété. / The expropriation for public purposes joins in a paradoxical order. The property right is one of fundamental rights of the person who has to, however, adapt himself to the necessities of town and country planning policies and town planning dictations by the evolution of the company(society). The constitutional, legislative and statutory texts, quite as the supranational in particular European texts, guarantee the property right. However, the textual guarantees are characterized by their stability, while the case law is, by definition, the reflection of the evolution of the company(society). He(it) returns to the judge to take into account, by his(its) sovereign appreciation of the facts, the fact that the expropriation became a technique of full arrangement(development). It is then advisable to distinguish the contribution of the administrative, judicial and European judges who contribute each, in a direct or indirect way and in different degrees, in protection of the property right.

O federalismo conhece, na experiência moderna, diversas formações e conformações, segundo a ideologia que o permeia e a necessidade histórica que o explica e que o implica. Embora não seja possível falar em um modelo puro ou autêntico de federalismo, há uma característica que lhe é essencial, cuja falta negaria sua própria razão de ser: a coexistência, sob o mesmo poder soberano, de duas ou mais sociedades políticas dotadas de estatalidade. A estatalidade é informada pela existência de um poder político de inaugurar determinada ordem jurídica. No Estado dito unitário, trata-se da soberania. No Estado dito federativo, a soberania convive com o poder político dos Estados federados - a autonomia federativa. Assim como a soberania, a autonomia federativa é um poder político constituinte, mas, ao contrário daquela, é também poder político constituído (competência), limitado pelo poder soberano. A autonomia federativa implica, ainda, a competência para constituir competências políticas e governamentais. Tais limites são postos pelo poder soberano na Constituição do Estado federativo, que define o grau de autonomia federativa. Esse poder tem sofrido oscilações ao longo das Constituições republicanas brasileiras, havendo, em todas elas, considerável disparidade entre a autonomia federativa formal (que o texto revela) e a autonomia federativa real (que se pratica), causada, sobretudo, pelo antagonismo dos interesses políticos e econômicos que determinam, em última instância, a descentralização político-governamental. A presente tese propõe a conceituação e a delimitação da autonomia federativa formal no Direito Constitucional brasileiro posto pela Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 / Federalism has had, in the modern experience, different frames and meanings, according to the ideology embedded into it and the historical necessity that explains and implies it. Although it is not possible to advocate a pure or authentic model for federalism, there is an essential feature, whose absence would deny its own reason for being: the coexistence, under the same sovereign power, of two or more political societies with statehood. Statehood is constituted by a political power capable to create a particular legal order. In so-called unitary states, such political power is the sovereignty. In federal states, the sovereignty of nation-state coexists with the political power of federated states - the federative autonomy. Like sovereignty, federative autonomy is a constitutional-political power. However, in contrast to the former, federative autonomy is also constituted political power (competence), limited by the sovereign power. The federative autonomy also implies the competence to establish political and governmental powers. These limits are set by the sovereign power in the Constitution of the federal state, which defines the degree of federative autonomy. Such power has oscillated along the Brazilian republican constitutions. All of them revealed considerable disparity between the formal federative autonomy (which the legal text provides) and the real federative autonomy (which is practiced), which was caused, mainly, by the antagonism between political and economic interests. Such interests ultimately determine political and governmental decentralization. This dissertation advocates the conceptualization and delimitation of formal federative autonomy in the Brazilian Constitutional Law set forth by the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:25:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Augusto Grieco.pdf: 807036 bytes, checksum: f5a5f167db0673f493e2cbc84d16a5d8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007-10-22 / The present masters degree dissertation has as an objective to establish the real position of the statements of The Council of Social Welfare Recourses ( in Portuguese Conselho de Recursos da Previdência Social CRPS) in the Brazilian law. This essay is justified by the evolution of the access to the courts by the commons users of the Social Security what brings the revival of the administrative process as an instrument of social protection. The focus of this work is the birth of the jurisprudence in social welfare by the processual exercise of the Public Administration. It emphasizes the unicity of the political power and its indivisibility, and the importance of the exercise of the administrative activity, in its jurisprudential guide lines as a basilar element for the State secures its purposes for the social order, such as the welfare and the social justice. This study recognizes the administrative process as a branch of the processual gender as so, one of the fundamental guarantee to the citizen. The core of this study will be the analysis of the instrument of jurisprudential uniformization at service of the Plenary Court of the Council of Social Welfare Recourses (CRPS). This work broaches the subject of the species of jurisprudential uniformization expected by the Internal Rules of the Council of Social Welfare Recourses (CRPS). At last, this essay arises essential conclusions developed during the study, which evidence of rule character of the statements of the Council of Social Welfare Recourses, which get in the Brazilian Law as rules of general and abstract character, as an element that binds all the administrative structure of the social welfare, mainly the Social Security National Institute / A presente dissertação de mestrado tem por finalidade situar os enunciados do Conselho de Recursos da Previdência Social no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro. Justifica-se o presente estudo diante da evolução do acesso à justiça por parte dos beneficiários que impõe um renascimento do processo administrativo como instrumento de proteção social. O trabalho focaliza a formação jurisprudencial administrativa previdenciária pelo exercício da processualidade no âmbito da Administração Pública. Destaca o poder político como uno e indivisível e o exercício da atividade administrativa pela sua linha jurisdicional como elemento fundamental para que o Estado alcance os objetivos traçados para a ordem social, quais sejam, o bem-estar e a justiça sociais. Reconhece o processo administrativo como uma espécie do gênero processo e como garantia fundamental do cidadão. O núcleo do estudo será, por sua vez, a análise do instrumento de uniformização jurisprudencial colocado à disposição do Conselho Pleno do CRPS. Por derradeiro, aborda as espécies de uniformização de jurisprudência previstas no Regimento Interno do CRPS. Ao final, apresentam-se as conclusões essenciais desenvolvidas durante o estudo, que evidenciam o caráter de norma aos enunciados do CRPS, os quais ingressam no ordenamento jurídico na qualidade de norma com caráter geral e abstrato, vinculando toda a estrutura administrativa previdenciária, em especial o Instituto Nacional do Seguro Social

O federalismo conhece, na experiência moderna, diversas formações e conformações, segundo a ideologia que o permeia e a necessidade histórica que o explica e que o implica. Embora não seja possível falar em um modelo puro ou autêntico de federalismo, há uma característica que lhe é essencial, cuja falta negaria sua própria razão de ser: a coexistência, sob o mesmo poder soberano, de duas ou mais sociedades políticas dotadas de estatalidade. A estatalidade é informada pela existência de um poder político de inaugurar determinada ordem jurídica. No Estado dito unitário, trata-se da soberania. No Estado dito federativo, a soberania convive com o poder político dos Estados federados - a autonomia federativa. Assim como a soberania, a autonomia federativa é um poder político constituinte, mas, ao contrário daquela, é também poder político constituído (competência), limitado pelo poder soberano. A autonomia federativa implica, ainda, a competência para constituir competências políticas e governamentais. Tais limites são postos pelo poder soberano na Constituição do Estado federativo, que define o grau de autonomia federativa. Esse poder tem sofrido oscilações ao longo das Constituições republicanas brasileiras, havendo, em todas elas, considerável disparidade entre a autonomia federativa formal (que o texto revela) e a autonomia federativa real (que se pratica), causada, sobretudo, pelo antagonismo dos interesses políticos e econômicos que determinam, em última instância, a descentralização político-governamental. A presente tese propõe a conceituação e a delimitação da autonomia federativa formal no Direito Constitucional brasileiro posto pela Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 / Federalism has had, in the modern experience, different frames and meanings, according to the ideology embedded into it and the historical necessity that explains and implies it. Although it is not possible to advocate a pure or authentic model for federalism, there is an essential feature, whose absence would deny its own reason for being: the coexistence, under the same sovereign power, of two or more political societies with statehood. Statehood is constituted by a political power capable to create a particular legal order. In so-called unitary states, such political power is the sovereignty. In federal states, the sovereignty of nation-state coexists with the political power of federated states - the federative autonomy. Like sovereignty, federative autonomy is a constitutional-political power. However, in contrast to the former, federative autonomy is also constituted political power (competence), limited by the sovereign power. The federative autonomy also implies the competence to establish political and governmental powers. These limits are set by the sovereign power in the Constitution of the federal state, which defines the degree of federative autonomy. Such power has oscillated along the Brazilian republican constitutions. All of them revealed considerable disparity between the formal federative autonomy (which the legal text provides) and the real federative autonomy (which is practiced), which was caused, mainly, by the antagonism between political and economic interests. Such interests ultimately determine political and governmental decentralization. This dissertation advocates the conceptualization and delimitation of formal federative autonomy in the Brazilian Constitutional Law set forth by the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:23:26Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Napoleao Casado Filho.pdf: 1373756 bytes, checksum: f0e78d5ac08707eaf66fc8f347c57f68 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-02-06 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Arbitration is sometimes seen a Justice system for rich people only. As a private system that needs to be paid, how does it deal with the principle of Acess to Justice? The aim of this thesis is to answer this question and to analyse how Brazilian law should approach the new phenomenon that the world of the International Law is now facing: third parties external to the conflict invest in International Arbitration in exchange for a share of the results of the arbitration proceedings. Throughout the thesis, we demonstrate how the phenomenon of Arbitration emerged in the contemporary world and the great challenges that Arbitration now faces, including the defy of assuring Access to a Jurisdictional Service to parties that do not have enough resources to meet the costs of the arbitration proceedings. We will use the Systems Theory to localize the Arbitration system as an autonomous legal subsystem. Then, we discuss how the world has seen the Third Party Funding phenomenom, concluding with our understanding on how Brazilian law must face this new reality, aligning it with our legal system / A arbitragem muitas vezes é vista como justiça dos ricos. Mecanismo privado e com custos, como ele se comporta em face do princípio do Acesso à Justiça? O objetivo desta tese é responder a essa indagação e analisar como o Direito brasileiro deve se comportar em face do novo fenômeno que acontece no mundo do Direito das Relações Econômicas Internacionais: terceiros, estranhos ao conflito, investem em Arbitragens Internacionais em troca de uma parcela do resultado do procedimento arbitral. Ao longo do trabalho, demonstramos como o fenômeno da Arbitragem surgiu no mundo contemporâneo e os grandes desafios que o instituto enfrenta, entre eles o do Acesso à Prestação Jurisdicional para partes que não têm recursos para sustentar os custos do procedimento arbitral. Recorreremos à Teoria dos Sistemas para posicionar a Arbitragem Comercial Internacional como subsistema jurídico autônomo. Em seguida, abordaremos como o mundo tem visto o fenômeno, concluindo com nosso entendimento sobre como o Direito brasileiro deve encarar essa nova realidade, compatibilizando-a com nosso ordenamento jurídico

Acte unique européen, Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice, Lisbonne, élargissements… les grandes révisions des traités de l’Union européenne se sont succédé à un rythme soutenu en vingt-cinq ans. Si cette série est nécessaire dans un processus évolutif d’intégration, elle montre également la difficulté de réformer l’Union. L’objet de cette étude est de déterminer le degré de rigidité des traités de l’Union européenne, en recherchant les causes, les obstacles et les conséquences juridiques de cette (in)adaptabilité des traités. La rigidité trouve sa source dans le processus de constitutionnalisation des traités qui a renforcé leur protection formelle et matérielle par l’émergence de limites au pouvoir de révision. La rigidité des traités est par ailleurs accentuée par celle de la procédure de révision ordinaire qui est fondée sur deux notions qui peuvent sembler antinomiques : le respect de la souveraineté des États membres, par la pluralité des mécanismes nationaux de ratification, et la volonté de démocratisation, par l’émergence de mécanismes européens de légitimation. Pour faciliter l’adaptabilité des traités, les États membres ont institué des procédures simplifiées, complémentaires et dérogatoires à la procédure de droit commun. Leur insuffisante distinction par rapport à la procédure de révision ordinaire les rend inefficaces, si bien que l’on assiste à une remise en cause de la rigidité des traités par le développement d’une révision implicite de leurs dispositions et d’une coopération entre les États membres à l’intensité différenciée voire hors du cadre institutionnel de l’Union. La recherche de moyens efficaces d’assouplissement de la rigidité des traités est donc nécessaire afin de conserver à la fois leur rang dans l’ordre juridique et l’unité du processus d’intégration européenne dans le cadre de l’Union européenne. / Single European Act, Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice, Lisbon, enlargements… Over a 25-year period, the major revisions of the European Union treaties followed one another at an intensive pace. If that series is necessary for a progressive process of integration, it also illustrates the challenge of reforming the Union. The purpose of this study is to determine the level of rigidity of the European Union Treaties by searching the legal causes, obstacles and consequences of the (in)adaptability of the treaties. Rigidity originates from the constitutionalisation process of the treaties, which consolidated their formal and substantial protection through the emergence of limits to the revision power. The rigidity of the treaties is further increased by that of the ordinary revision procedure, which is based on two notions that may appear antinomic: the respect of the Member States sovereignty (through the plurality of the national mechanisms of ratification), and the willingness of democratisation (through the emergence of European mechanisms of legitimacy). In order to facilitate the adaptability of the treaties, the Member States established simplified procedures, which complement and derogate to the general procedure. As they do not significantly differ from the ordinary revision procedure, they are not efficient; a reconsideration of the rigidity of the treaties can then be observed through the development of an implicit revision of their provisions as well as a cooperation between Member States, the intensity of which is differentiated, and which may grow beside the Union’s institutional framework. Therefore, the pursuit of efficient ways to relax the rigidity of the treaties is necessary to maintain both their position within the legal order and the unity of the European integration process within the framework of the European Union.

Widespread cross-border securities trading have led to the internationalization of securities markets. No one seriously disputes that such securities dealings require regulation, but there is no academic consensus on the best normative approach to such regulation. The academic debate initially focused on whether regulatory competition or cooperation constitutes the better model. However, the debate seems to have evolved to adopt a hybrid model combining the virtues of these two approaches. ‘Harmonization’ constitutes the dominant hybrid model. Nevertheless, the implementation of the harmonization model has barely received any attention in the literature. The aim of this thesis is hence two-fold: first, justify why harmonization should be the preferred model for the regulation of international securities markets; and second, develop, applying an international trade regulation perspective, a regulatory framework to implement the harmonization model using the World Trade Organization and General Agreement on Trade in Services (WTO/GATS) framework.