Legislation in various jurisdictions alters the common law right to control access to one???s land by allowing the imposition of rights of access in favour of one landowner over the land of another. The relevant legislation can be divided into two categories. The first-generation legislation (s 88K, Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) and s 180, Property Law Act 1974 (Qld)) permits the creation of easements over servient land to facilitate the development of dominant land. The second-generation legislation (the Access to Neighbouring Land Act of New South Wales, Tasmania and the United Kingdom) permits the creation of temporary rights of access over servient land to facilitate work on dominant land. This thesis examines the extent to which this change in the law can be justified by three modes of ethical discourse: right-based, duty-based, and goal-based reasoning. An examination of the first-generation legislation and the cases in which it has been applied suggests that a form of goal-based reasoning can be used to justify its enactment. The legislation is needed to facilitate the efficient use of land where the existence of a bilateral monopoly and the possibility of strategic bargaining puts at risk the conclusion of a mutually beneficial agreement regarding access. A review of the second-generation legislation and the law reform reports and parliamentary debate that preceded its enactment indicates that the legislation can be justified by a form of duty-based reasoning. The legislation is needed to bring about a proper social ordering by imposing access rights where this would be consistent with the ideal of good neighbourliness. The thesis concludes that although these goal-based and duty-based discourses make an arguable case for the enactment of both generations of the legislation, neither of them, in an unadulterated form, provides a conclusive justification. Rather, an eclectic approach that draws on both discourses is required. It proposes that the legislation???s compensation provisions be amended to reflect the commingling of the ideas of efficiency, a properly ordered society and intensive land use, and to allow the servient owner to share in the benefits generated by the imposition of access.

Legislation in various jurisdictions alters the common law right to control access to one???s land by allowing the imposition of rights of access in favour of one landowner over the land of another. The relevant legislation can be divided into two categories. The first-generation legislation (s 88K, Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) and s 180, Property Law Act 1974 (Qld)) permits the creation of easements over servient land to facilitate the development of dominant land. The second-generation legislation (the Access to Neighbouring Land Act of New South Wales, Tasmania and the United Kingdom) permits the creation of temporary rights of access over servient land to facilitate work on dominant land. This thesis examines the extent to which this change in the law can be justified by three modes of ethical discourse: right-based, duty-based, and goal-based reasoning. An examination of the first-generation legislation and the cases in which it has been applied suggests that a form of goal-based reasoning can be used to justify its enactment. The legislation is needed to facilitate the efficient use of land where the existence of a bilateral monopoly and the possibility of strategic bargaining puts at risk the conclusion of a mutually beneficial agreement regarding access. A review of the second-generation legislation and the law reform reports and parliamentary debate that preceded its enactment indicates that the legislation can be justified by a form of duty-based reasoning. The legislation is needed to bring about a proper social ordering by imposing access rights where this would be consistent with the ideal of good neighbourliness. The thesis concludes that although these goal-based and duty-based discourses make an arguable case for the enactment of both generations of the legislation, neither of them, in an unadulterated form, provides a conclusive justification. Rather, an eclectic approach that draws on both discourses is required. It proposes that the legislation???s compensation provisions be amended to reflect the commingling of the ideas of efficiency, a properly ordered society and intensive land use, and to allow the servient owner to share in the benefits generated by the imposition of access.

Legislation in various jurisdictions alters the common law right to control access to one???s land by allowing the imposition of rights of access in favour of one landowner over the land of another. The relevant legislation can be divided into two categories. The first-generation legislation (s 88K, Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) and s 180, Property Law Act 1974 (Qld)) permits the creation of easements over servient land to facilitate the development of dominant land. The second-generation legislation (the Access to Neighbouring Land Act of New South Wales, Tasmania and the United Kingdom) permits the creation of temporary rights of access over servient land to facilitate work on dominant land. This thesis examines the extent to which this change in the law can be justified by three modes of ethical discourse: right-based, duty-based, and goal-based reasoning. An examination of the first-generation legislation and the cases in which it has been applied suggests that a form of goal-based reasoning can be used to justify its enactment. The legislation is needed to facilitate the efficient use of land where the existence of a bilateral monopoly and the possibility of strategic bargaining puts at risk the conclusion of a mutually beneficial agreement regarding access. A review of the second-generation legislation and the law reform reports and parliamentary debate that preceded its enactment indicates that the legislation can be justified by a form of duty-based reasoning. The legislation is needed to bring about a proper social ordering by imposing access rights where this would be consistent with the ideal of good neighbourliness. The thesis concludes that although these goal-based and duty-based discourses make an arguable case for the enactment of both generations of the legislation, neither of them, in an unadulterated form, provides a conclusive justification. Rather, an eclectic approach that draws on both discourses is required. It proposes that the legislation???s compensation provisions be amended to reflect the commingling of the ideas of efficiency, a properly ordered society and intensive land use, and to allow the servient owner to share in the benefits generated by the imposition of access.

This thesis examines why courts in the United States of America (US), India and South Africa refer to foreign law in death penalty cases. To gain an understanding of what drives the apex courts of the US, India and South Africa to cite foreign law when considering domestic death penalty issues, this thesis proposes a three-part matrix to both assess the relevant case law and to analyse the academic literature on cross-citation. Firstly, it will be demonstrated that judges in national courts cross-cite comparative law out of a primary interest in constitutional interpretation. Cross-citation is used in this manner to assist judges in their domestic interpretative tasks. Secondly, it will be illustrated how courts that engage in the citation of foreign law also seek guidance from other jurisdictions as to the content of shared values, such as what type of punishment does not fundamentally and unlawfully violate the right to human dignity. Finally, this thesis assesses to what degree courts from the three selected jurisdictions are additionally referencing or applying a customary international law norm when citing foreign sources. The argument is made that the domestic courts under examination engage with comparative law in the context of a broader transnational normative project, taking the international human rights framework that developed after the Second World War as a key reference point. In doing so, this thesis argues that these courts are at times recognising and developing emerging customary norms, and at other times giving effect to and enforcing applicable international human rights law.

Submitted by Ana Guimarães Pereira (agpereir@ucs.br) on 2016-06-22T12:17:20Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertacao Nelson Gularte Ramos Neto.pdf: 1875450 bytes, checksum: aefa85140e6c8f1d72866563bad627c2 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-22T12:17:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertacao Nelson Gularte Ramos Neto.pdf: 1875450 bytes, checksum: aefa85140e6c8f1d72866563bad627c2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-06-22

A discussão acerca da judicialização de políticas públicas ganhou um espaço cada vez maior no cenário jurídico nacional. À medida que as demandas judiciais se multiplicam, vai se firmando um entendimento que se identifica como doutrina brasileira do controle judicial de políticas públicas. Os autores que formam esse posicionamento majoritário concordam com a legitimidade do Judiciário para exercer a referida função de controle e apresentam os fundamentos que devem embasar a decisão judicial nos casos concretos. Para esses casos difíceis, a doutrina brasileira propõe uma decisão com base no princípio da proporcionalidade na forma pela qual foi idealizado por Robert Alexy, tendo em vista que as controvérsias devem ser resolvidas pela ponderação de princípios. Incentiva-se, com apoio na teoria neoconstitucionalista, o protagonismo do juiz na tarefa de controle. As políticas públicas ambientais, quando judicializadas, encontram decisões bastante diversificadas, muitas delas antagônicas, resultantes da aplicação do princípio da proporcionalidade ou de raciocínios silogísticos como a subsunção. A análise das decisões permite verificar uma inconsistência na sua fundamentação. Por sua vez, o estudo mais acurado das propostas da doutrina brasileira do controle judicial de políticas públicas demonstra a maneira pela qual a teoria é dependente da discricionariedade judicial, a mais marcante característica do positivismo jurídico. O mesmo problema está presente na teoria de Robert Alexy. Pretende-se comprovar que os vícios de justificação encontrados nos precedentes jurisprudenciais são resultados de problemas paradigmáticos, tal qual o poder discricionário do juiz para o positivismo normativista, bem como o método e a filosofia da consciência para a metafísica moderna. A teoria da decisão judicial necessita de uma ruptura paradigmática tanto no campo do Direito como no da filosofia, de modo que possa absorver a invasão da filosofia pela linguagem operada pelo giro ontológico-linguístico e a busca pela legitimidade que é marca do paradigma pós-positivista, diante das inegáveis vinculações existentes entre a filosofia e o Direito. A fim de construir uma teoria da decisão adequada a esses propósitos, busca-se no Direito como conceito interpretativo de Ronald Dworkin, à luz das contribuições proporcionadas pela hermenêutica filosófica e a crítica hermenêutica do Direito, a possibilidade de edificar uma decisão antidiscricionária. O controle judicial de políticas públicas ambientais deve ser pautado pela existência de um argumento de princípio, além de uma justificação decisória que consagre a integridade e coerência na aplicação do Direito. / The discussion about public policies judicialization won an increasingly larger space in the national legal setting. As the lawsuits multiply, there is an agreement that is identified as Brazilian doctrine of judicial review of public policies. Authors who make up this majority position agree with the legitimacy of the judiciary to exercise this control function and feature the arguments that must base the court decision in a particular case. For those hard cases, the Brazilian doctrine proposes a decision based on the principle of proportionality in the way it was designed by Robert Alexy, given that disputes should be resolved by weighting principles. Is encouraged, supported in new constitutionalism theory, the role of the judge in the control task. Environmental policies, when judicialized, are quite diverse decisions, many of them antagonistic, resulting from the application of the principle of proportionality or syllogistic reasoning as subsumption. The analysis of decisions allows you to check an inconsistency in its reasoning. In turn, the closer study of the proposals of the Brazilian doctrine of the judicial review of public policies demonstrates the way in which the theory is dependent on judicial discretion, the most striking feature of normative positivism. The same problem is present in the theory of Robert Alexy. It is intended to prove the vices of justification found in the precedents are the result of paradigmatic problems, like the discretionary power of the judge to the normative positivism, as well as the method and philosophy of consciousness for modern metaphysics. The theory of judicial decision requires a paradigmatic rupture both in the field of law and in philosophy, so that it can absorb the invasion of philosophy by language operated by the ontological-linguistic turn and the search for legitimacy that marks the post-positivist paradigm in the face of undeniable existing links between philosophy and law. In order to construct a theory of proper decision for these purposes, looking at the Law as an interpretative concept like Ronald Dworkin, in the light of the contributions provided by the philosophical hermeneutics and the hermeneutical criticism of the law, the possibility of building a non-discretionary decision. The judicial review of environmental policies must be guided by the existence of an argument of principle, as well as a decision-making justification to devote integrity and consistency in the application of law.

An overview is given of the difficulties surrounding the concurrent jurisdiction of the Labour Court and High Court The main categories of the jurisdictional dispute are identified and systemised. The main branches are those of statutory overlap and interpretation of statutes. Statutory overlap concerns matters remaining from the industrial court era, urgent applications, delict and law of contract. Statutory interpretation mainly involves the interpretation of provisions in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. An overview of the principles of jurisdiction with respect to the different courts, as well as a brief historical review of the development of such jurisdiction is given. Particular attention is given to the role of fundamental rights in the Constitution. Broad principles are identified whereby the difficulties may be addressed.

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:18:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_hugo_dias.pdf: 428127 bytes, checksum: 1ed10becc2266346853b96da5dcc9734 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-12-01 / The dissertation examines the theory Egológica Carlos Cossio, considering the developments proposed by the paradigm of complexity, in a proposal for transdisciplinarity to identify the legal phenomenon. The approach used employs the theme revealing method as a tool for interpreting the law. The work examines the formation of the theory egológica, understood from the analysis of human behavior as the center of legal effectiveness. Demonstrating that were developed in the field of cognitive psychology to understanding the parameters of the decision process of individuals / A dissertação examina a teoria Egológica de Carlos Cossio, considerando os desdobramentos propostos pelo paradigma de complexidade, em uma proposta de transdiciplinaridade para identificação do fenômeno jurídico. A abordagem realizada do tema emprega o método indiciário como ferramenta para interpretação do Direito. O trabalho examina a formação da teoria egológica compreendida a partir da análise da conduta humana como centro da efetividade jurídica, demonstrando que foram desenvolvidos parâmetros no campo da psicologia cognitiva para compreensão do processo de decisão dos indivíduos

No description available.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2018-07-25T11:52:23Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Fernanda Mara de Oliveira Macedo Carneiro Pacobahyba.pdf: 2034067 bytes, checksum: 3152b483af6e834bafb8609a021c1b03 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-07-25T11:52:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fernanda Mara de Oliveira Macedo Carneiro Pacobahyba.pdf: 2034067 bytes, checksum: 3152b483af6e834bafb8609a021c1b03 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-04-24 / When observing the way in which the juridical-tax interpretation has been processed, distinct movements are perceived and that seem to fit in a point of intellectual confrontation. On the one hand, traditional hermeneutics, based on the literality of the CTN, which seeks the meaning of normative texts from an extraction of their contents. And from this hermeneutics, the construction of doctrine and jurisprudence that makes verberar a sense of assertiveness, completeness, certainty. From another perspective, movements that identify law as being a language, which culminates in complex ideas and a constant dialogue between texts, given the difficulty always present in seeing the legal reality under the sign of language. In the doctrine and jurisprudence that follow, deepening in matters that before seemed exhausted, returns to the fundamental normative structures and recognition of the incompleteness of everything that is said about the legal-tributary phenomenon. And here, emerges the Logical-Semantic Constructivism, by Paulo de Barros Carvalho. The justification of this research is based on the original approach that seeks to offer to the problematic, considering that it approaches the idea of hermeneutical movements in the Science of Law, in order to investigate the possibility of establishing the proper characteristics of these two movements, located in times not -chronic logics: the first, from the "past that is still present", represents the traditional approach; the second, of the "future that is already present", has as its starting point the fundamental work of Logical-Semantic Constructivism. Thus, the starting problem is: can individual different motifs be identified in the way Brazilian juridical-tax hermeneutics takes place? The general objective of the research is to investigate the possibility of identifying these hermeneutical movements and the establishment of characters that represent the overcoming of the traditional model, given the inflows resulting from the adoption of the paradigm of language, as well as the promulgation of the Federal Constitution of 1988 and, more recently, the new Code of Civil Procedure. The methodology used is the path that interweaves the analytical-hermeneutic method, which is characteristic of Logical-Semantic Constructivism, under the influence of semiotic perspectives in the juridical data: here the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic plans structuring of language, by which the object itself is constructed by a subject, which is also by language. With all of this, the structuring of the thought contained in this work margeia reflections that are processed in the scope of Legal Epistemology, Law Theory and Tax Law itself. The central hypothesis of the work is that, in spite of new intellectual influences in Brazilian juridical-tax doctrine, jurists and scholars of tax law still rely on ulteriorated hermeneutic views, clinging to the use of the various methods scattered in the CTN and masking the complexity of the normative phenomenon. This is true even after the decisive influences of CF / 88. In this way, the possibilities that allow us to deal with different paradigms in the interpretation of texts and legal-tax aspects, as a way of undertaking a new legal rationality that align General Theory of Law and Tax Law from the dialogue between the different languages are deepened, competent and incompetent, which are reflected in Brazilian normative discourse / Ao se observar a maneira como se processa a interpretação jurídico-tributária, percebem-se movimentos distintos e que parecem calhar em um ponto de enfrentamento intelectual. De um lado, a Hermenêutica tradicional, fincada na literalidade do CTN, e que busca o sentido dos textos normativos com base na extração de seus conteúdos. E arrimada nesta Hermenêutica, a elaboração da doutrina e da jurisprudência que que faz verberar um sentido de assertividade, de completude, de certeza. Sob outra perspectiva, movimentos que identificam o Direito como sendo linguagem, o que faz culminar em ideias complexas e em um diálogo constante entre textos, dada a dificuldade sempre ocorrente em se enxergar a realidade jurídica sob o signo da linguagem. Na doutrina e na jurisprudência que lhe seguem, aprofundamentos em matérias que antes pareciam esgotadas, retornos às estruturas fundamentais normativas e reconhecimento da incompletude de tudo quanto se diga acerca do fenômeno jurídico-tributário. E aqui desponta o Constructivismo Lógico-Semântico, de Paulo de Barros Carvalho. A justificativa desta pesquisa se fundamenta no enfoque original que se busca oferecer à problemática, tendo em vista que aborda a ideia de movimentos hermenêuticos na Ciência do Direito, de sorte a investigar a possibilidade de estabelecimento dos caracteres próprios desses dois movimentos, situados em tempos não cronológicos distintos: o primeiro, do “passado que ainda se faz presente”, representa o enfoque tradicional; o segundo, do “futuro que já se faz presente”, tem como ponto de partida a obra fundamental do Constructivismo Lógico-Semântico. Com efeito, o problema de partida é: podem ser individualizados mo(vi)mentos distintos na maneira como se processa a Hermenêutica Jurídico-Tributária brasileira? O objetivo geral da pesquisa é investigar a possibilidade de identificação desses movimentos hermenêuticos e o estabelecimento de caracteres que representem a superação do modelo tradicional, dados os influxos decorrentes da adoção do paradigma da linguagem, bem como da promulgação da Constituição Federal de 1988 e, mais recentemente, do Código de Processo Civil de 2016. A metodologia utilizada é o caminho que interlaça o método analítico-hermenêutico, próprio do Constructivismo Lógico-Semântico, sob os influxos de perspectivas semióticas no dado jurídico: aqui, a estruturação de planos sintático, semântico e pragmático da linguagem, pelo qual o próprio objeto é construído por um sujeito, que também é pela linguagem. Com tudo isso, a estruturação do pensamento contido neste trabalho margeia reflexões que se processam no âmbito da Epistemologia Jurídica, da Teoria do Direito e do próprio Direito Tributário. A hipótese central do trabalho é que, apesar de novos influxos intelectuais na dogmática jurídico-tributária brasileira, os juristas e estudiosos do Direito Tributário ainda se valem de panoramas hermenêuticos ultrapassados, apegando-se à utilização dos diversos métodos espraiados no CTN e que mascaram a complexidade do fenômeno normativo. E isso se dá mesmo após as influências determinantes da CF/88. Efetivamente, aprofundam-se as possibilidades que permitem lidar com paradigmas diferenciados na interpretação dos textos e dos fatos jurídico-tributários, como a maneira de empreender uma nova racionalidade jurídica que alinhe Teoria Geral do Direito e Direito Tributário com esteio no diálogo entre as diversas linguagens, competentes e incompetentes, que se plasmam no discurso normativo brasileiro