Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

Government intervention in the financial and social affairs of citizens has increased dramatically in the last fifty years. As a result, government administrative decisions continually affect the everyday lives of people. Many of these decisions are discretionary. Modern administrative law has grown to meet the need for governments, rather than the courts, to supervise the exercise of administrative power so that injustice resulting from misuse of power can be avoided. The merits review system is an integral part of this administrative law. The effectiveness of the merits review system is dependent upon how Parliament makes provision for merits review in the legislative process. The object of this thesis is to analyse and evaluate the effectiveness of the scope of the Commonwealth administrative law merits review system. An evaluation of the availability of rights of review of the merits of Commonwealth administrative decisions will determine the extent to which Commonwealth law provides for merits review of administrative decisions. This thesis makes such an evaluation by undertaking an empirical study of the merits review provisions in Commonwealth legislation. The empirical study analyses 1,070 Commonwealth statutes and establishes that there are 340 statutes that confer power to make a reviewable decision or decisions. However, only 30 percent of these statutes provide for merits review of all reviewable decisions, while 44 percent provide for merits review of some decisions and 26 percent do not provide for merits review of any decisions. Consequently, the empirical study identifies inconsistencies in the provision of merits review of Commonwealth administrative decisions. The Australian parliamentary executive system of government has permitted a breakdown in the legislative drafting process that has allowed these inconsistencies to develop. Moreover, the executive arm of the Commonwealth government has diminished its accountability to Parliament for some of the administrative decisions made by it. A person affected by an unreviewable administrative decision may be treated unjustly as a result.

This article addresses the temporary measures on the merits, to the author this is a hybrid concept within the Peruvian procedural system. to explain this procedural notion, the author begins alluding to the differentiated tutelage and, within it, the self-help measures; then he refers to the procedural stage where the temporary measures on the merits should be placed and also makes a comparison between precautionary measures and self-help measures to conclude that the temporary measures on the merits must be treated as self-help measures. / El presente artículo aborda las medidas temporales sobre el fondo, que para el autor es un concepto híbrido dentro del sistema procesal peruano. Para explicar esta noción procesal el autor empieza haciendo alusión a la tutela diferenciada y, dentro de ella, a las medidas autosatisfactivas; luego de ello, se refiere al escenario procesal donde deberían ubicarse las medidas temporales sobre el fondo y, además, hace una comparación entre las medidas cautelares y las medidasautosatisfactivas para concluir que las medidas temporales sobre el fondodeben asimilarse como medidas autosatisfactivas.

The motivation for the creation of this diploma thesis was the analysis of the highest and best use of property (HABU). In the practical part the analysis is applied to concrete examples of the use of unbuilt land, which is located in Brno-Kohoutovice on the street Libušina třída. The theoretical part describes and explains 4 basic hypotheses on which the HABU analysis is based (legal admissibility, physical possibility, financial merits and maximum profitability). The aim of this thesis is to determine which of the variants will be the most profitable, respectively, which will have the highest and the best use.

A technical solution to the problem of unavoidable movements in bridge structures is the use of bridge bearings. Bridge bearings are small integral parts of the entire bridge structure serving several purposes, such as connection, transfer of forces, allowing movements, force damping etc. However, bridge bearings could create more problems for the bridge structure than it solves if not properly understood, especially when it receives less attention than it deserves. Technical and practical issues, such as selection of the right bearing type for use, merits and demerits of different bearing types, maintenance and monitoring, replacement, life cycle cost etc. are all imperative to ensure that bearings satisfy their purpose.   This study takes into consideration the practical and theoretical experience available for the use of bridge bearings. Two electronic surveys were used to garner knowledge and expertise from bridge engineers, bearing manufacturers and other stake holders in the course of this study, also practical knowledge concerning various types and problems of bridge bearings, maintenance, repair and replacement, life cycle costing etc. were employed in addition to physical investigation of bridge bearings in the Stockholm area of Sweden.   Generally, all bearing types were found to perform their functions satisfactorily when in good conditions, though inevitable problem of degradation reduces the life span of these bearings, especially the ones made mainly of steel being affected by corrosion. Those made of rubber components also degrade and perform poorly in low temperatures and under high load magnitude, though they are the most economical solution to many problems, especially in seismically active areas. Modern and enclosed bearing types such as pot, spherical, disc, LRB, FPB etc. are best used in critical conditions like high vertical load, extensive degree/extent of movement, seismic areas etc. but they are expensive solutions due to technicality in construction, and they are not exempted from various problems of degradation.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:23:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertacao Izabelle Albuquerque Costa Maia.pdf: 1157747 bytes, checksum: 6d54095d3b5807e97809602616f867ff (MD5) Previous issue date: 2005-12-02 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This dissertation s scope has in view to develop a study about the lawsuit referred in the article 485, V, of the Brazilian Procedural Codification (in Portuguese, this codification is named Código de Processo Civil, or CPC), indicated to obstruct a decision that violates the law. The approach chosen drives the dissertation to the study about (i) the general points (lawsuit conditions, procedural requests) and (ii) the specific points (a court decision that doesn t admits revision, term to propose the lawsuit and others legal hypothesis) asked to propose the lawsuit based on the article 485 of the CPC and, more specifically, based on the article 485, V, of the CPC (lawsuit appropriated to rescind a court decision that contains a law violation). According to this planning, deserves approach the lawsuit based on the article 485 as a common lawsuit, with requests legally established in the procedural legislation, and also are studied some general aspects concerning to the procedural admission such as legitimacy, legal competence and the capacity to suspend the execution of the illegal decision. Also deserves attention the exceptional character of the lawsuit based on the article 485, V, of the CPC, considering that its object is to attack a jurisdictional decision that can not be changed by the regular ways (appellation, for instance). The dissertation concludes indicating an amplified interpretation about the article 485, V, of the CPC, approaching all the law violations mentioned in the Brazilian legislation, in order to give priority to the concept of Justice in comparison with the concept of security, specially in situations in which a decision contains a substantial law violation. / Este trabalho visa ao estudo da ação rescisória fundada em violação a literal disposição de lei, hipótese prevista no inciso V do artigo 485 do Código de Processo Civil brasileiro. A abordagem se restringe à admissibilidade da ação. Objetiva-se a apreciação dos pressupostos necessários à admissibilidade da ação rescisória, partindo dos genéricos (condições da ação e pressupostos processuais), exigíveis para todas as ações, passando pelos específicos (sentença de mérito, trânsito em julgado, prazo e enquadramento numa das hipóteses legais), pertinentes a todas as ações rescisórias, e chegando, enfim, aos que delineiam a hipótese de violação a literal disposição de lei , ensejadora da ação rescisória objeto da análise. Para tanto, explica-se o enquadramento da ação rescisória como ação típica, cujos fundamentos se encontram previstos taxativamente na lei processual, e se faz uma incursão pelos aspectos gerais da ação rescisória, como a legitimidade, a competência e o meio para suspender a execução do julgado rescindendo, itens indispensáveis para a compreensão da temática central. Ressalta-se, em diversas passagens, o caráter excepcional da ação rescisória, cuja finalidade é a desconstituição da autoridade da coisa julgada que torna imutável a sentença de mérito. Impõe-se a conclusão de que se deve dar à hipótese do inciso V do artigo 485 do Código de Processo Civil uma interpretação ampliativa, de forma a abranger todas as violações às normas que compõem o ordenamento jurídico, a fim de evitar a prevalência da segurança em detrimento da justiça (proximidade com o direito material), em situação para a qual o sistema prevê um instrumento propício à superação da barreira consubstanciada na coisa julgada e a subseqüente rescisão (anulação) da decisão judicial viciada, contrária ao direito material regulador da espécie.