This examination of the common law obligation of good faith in the performance and enforcement of commercial contracts in Australia seeks to achieve a number of objectives. First, to chart the historical development of the implied good faith obligation. Secondly, to identify a number of issues that remain unresolved at Australian lower court level. Thirdly, to consider five doctrinal approaches that could be adopted by the High Court when ultimately confronted by the competing claims and tensions that have proven divisive in the courts below. Fourthly, to assess each approach against three identified benchmarks. The essential thesis is that good faith should be implied, as a matter of law, in commercial contracts that are relational in nature with an additional call being made for the High Court to explicitly recognise that the underlying basis of the implied good faith obligation is the reasonable expectations of the contractual parties. This approach is the one approach that satisfies all three benchmarks and provides the most satisfactory resolution of the issues that presently bedevil the commercial good faith debate in Australia.

Distinguer entre le droit commun et le droit spécial est une habitude fortement ancrée chez les juristes, dans le domaine de la théorie comme de la pratique. Les rôles attribués à cette distinction sont d’une grande diversité ; mais ils sont aussi sous la menace de deux phénomènes : la multiplication des degrés de spécialité et le développement de rapports -horizontaux - entre droits communs d'une part, et entre droits spéciaux d'autre part. Véritable "summa divisio", elle disposerait cependant toujours d’une vertu ordonnatrice très importante,tant pour le législateur que pour le juge, et tant à l’université que dans la pratique.Il y a pourtant un singulier paradoxe. Le droit commun et le droit spécial sont indéfinissables ; leur relativité est telle qu’ils ne se conçoivent pas abstraction faite l’un de l’autre. Et, toutefois, la relation qu’ils entretiennent est généralement décrite en termes d’opposition. Or, la relativité appelle bien plutôt la collaboration que l’opposition.C’est ainsi que, s’agissant de l’élaboration du droit, des influences positives sont à l’oeuvre. Le droit commun et le droit spécial se servent mutuellement de modèle. Leur évolution se déroule en contemplation l'un de l'autre. Cela permet surtout, concernant l’application du droit, de réfuter l’idée suivant laquelle le droit commun et le droit spécial s’excluraient mécaniquement. En dehors des hypothèses prévues par le droit écrit, aucun fondement ne justifie l’exclusivisme. Ce dernier ne dispose en outre que d’un régime juridique plein d’incertitude. La valeur de la solution préconisée par l’adage "Specialia generalibus derogant" n’est que celle d’une présomption, simple. « Sur-mesure », le droit spécial est supposé mieux adapté à la situation litigieuse, mais il peut concrètement se révéler moins approprié que le droit commun / Distinguishing between general and specific rules of law is a deeply rooted habit among civilist lawyers, concerning the field of theory as the practice one. The roles of this distinction are very different, but they are threatened by two kinds of phenomenas as well : the increasing degreesof specialization and the development of -horizontal- relationship between general rules of lawon the one hand, and specific rules of law in the other hand. As a genuine, it would work,however, always as a good way to order the priority of different rules of law for both legislature and judges, both in academia and in practice.There is however a singular paradox. The general and specific rules of law can't be defined,their relativity is such an obvious one that they inconceivable if the other doesn't exist. According to this idea, their relationship is usually described in terms of opposition. Yet, the meaning of "relativity" is closer to collaboration rather than opposition.Thus, as regards to the development of the law, positive influences are at work. General and specific rule of law are a model to each other. Their evolution takes place in contemplation ofeach part. This especially helps the application of law to refute the idea that the general andspecific rules of law are mechanically mutually exclusive. A part from the possibilities provided by statute law, no basis justifies exclusiveness. Furthermore, specific rules of law sometimes contain a lot of less-defined rules. The value of the solution advocated by the adage "specialia generalibus derogant " is just a presumption, a simple one. A specific rule of law is supposes to be perfectly adapted to a situation, but it may pragmatically, about some case, be less appropriate than the general rule of law.

L’objet de cette thèse est de replacer la Constitution de la Fédération de Russie, adoptée par référendum le 12 décembre 1993, dans ses différents contextes de production. En effet, ce texte juridique est à la fois le produit d’une Histoire courte et d’une Histoire longue, d’un conflit intra-élite et d’une somme de représentations héritées des périodes précédentes et reconstruites à la fin des années 80 et au début des années 90. Ainsi, il ne semblait pas suffisamment pertinent de limiter notre étude au processus rédactionnel proprement dit, entamé à l’été 1990. Nous avons pris le parti de tenter de reconstituer ce que pouvait être l’« épistémè », les représentations politico-juridiques, des acteurs ayant joué un rôle décisif dans la discussion de la Constitution. Ce parti nécessitait de retracer les occurrences les plus significatives de l’Histoire du droit et des institutions en Russie tsariste et en Union Soviétique. Cette démarche fait l’objet de la première partie de la Thèse, « La Péréstroïka comme réceptacle, révolution et modèle ». Il ressort de l’analyse que malgré la présence de traditions intellectuelles libérales et d’institutions proto-parlementaires, la tradition dominante, et acceptée comme telle par les rédacteurs de la Constitution russe, est largement antijuridique et autoritaire. C’est dans ce contexte que les acteurs de la Ière République russe ont cherché à puiser dans les modèles étrangers (américain et français en particulier) et les modèles théoriques du Droit constitutionnel (régime parlementaire et régime présidentiel) pour créer le nouvel agencement institutionnel. La seconde partie de la thèse, « Le processus de rédaction de la Constitution de 1993 », porte sur l’Histoire courte, c’est-à-dire sur les années 1990-1993 qui ont vu s’affronter deux camps, tant sur le plan politique que constitutionnel. Le camp du Congrès des députés du peuple emmené par son Président Rouslan Khasboulatov défendait un projet permettant d’assurer la domination du Parlement, alors que le camp du Président de la Fédération, emmené par Boris Eltsine, cherchait à imposer un projet assurant à la présidence une position dominante. De part et d’autre, les modèles empiriques et théoriques du Droit constitutionnel furent instrumentalisés et largement trahis. Entre ces deux camps, la Commission constitutionnelle crée au sein du Congrès des députés du peuple cherchait, à travers ses différents projets, à trouver un agencement équilibré nourri des expériences étrangères et de la science du Droit constitutionnel. Le camp de la présidence réussit finalement à faire prévaloir ses vues, dans le cadre d’une Conférence constitutionnelle organisée en juin 1993, mais surtout par sa victoire politique sur le camp du Congrès suite à la crise d’octobre 1993. Le texte adopté par référendum le 12 décembre 1993, très favorable à la Présidence, peut être considéré comme l’héritier de ce conflit, mais également en partie comme l’héritier des traditions politiques russes et soviétiques. / The aim of this dissertation is to analyse the Constitution of the Russian Federation passed by referendum on 12 December 1993, in its various contexts of production. Indeed, this legal text is both the result of a short history and of a long history, of an intra-elite conflict and of an amount of representations, inherited from the past and rebuilt at the end of the 80’s and at the beginning of the 90’s. We chose to attempt to reconstruct what has been the « épistémè », the legal and political representations of the key actors of the constitutional discussions. This choice made it necessary to recount the most significant facts and conceptions of the legal and institutional history of Tsarist Russia and Soviet Union. This approach is found in the first part of this dissertation, « Perestroika as a recipient, a revolution and a model ». It appears that despite the existence of liberal traditions and proto-parliamentary institutions, the dominant tradition, granted as such by the drafters of the Russian Constitution, is basically anti-juridical and authoritarian. It is in this context that the actors of the first Russian Republic tried to use foreign patterns (mostly American and French) and the theoretical patterns of Constitutional law (parliamentary regime and presidential regime) in order to create the new institutional design. The second part of the dissertation, « The redaction process of the Constitution of 1993 », deals with short history, that is years the 1990-1993 during which two sides challenged each other, both on a political and on constitutional grounds. The side of the Congress of People’s Deputies led by its President, Ruslan Khasbulatov, promoted a project of Parliament domination, while the side of the President of the Federation promoted a project of President domination. On both sides, empirical and theoretical patterns of constitutional law were exploited and their true meanings betrayed. Between these two sides, the Constitutional Commission created by the Congress of People’s Deputies, through its several drafts, tried to find a balanced design on the basis of foreign patterns and of the science of constitutional law. Finally, on the side of the President there was success in making its conceptions prevail, within a Constitutional Conference organized in June 1993, but mainly through its political victory of October 1993. The text passed on 12 December 1993, very much in favor of the Presidency, can be considered as the heir of this conflict, but as well partly as the heir of Russian and Soviet political traditions.

The word endogenic means growing or proceeding from within, it is commonly used to describe the process of tectonic movement and earth crust formation caused by the extrusion of magmatic material. My project is a metaphorical exploration of the geological term “endogenic process” as well as an exploration of a design approach based on the term.The work explores soft form-bearing structures and textile bodies that contrast in relation to the hard framework of the rectangular room. It touches on material hierarchies in the living environment and the field of spatial design. The research explores the relationship between interior bodies and spatial frameworks. It aims to highlight the importance of the subject within the framework of the rectangular space that divides the interior of most buildings. My work involves exploring the endogenic process as a way of relating to the creative process and through the use of soft structures and drapery creating furniture that engages people with the spatial framework of the rectangular room. It is an exploration of spatial furniture that constitutes a connection and physical involvement between bodies and space, a kind of furniture providing a multiplicity of possibilities.

A tension arises whenever the South African private law fails to meet constitutional right norms. To remedy a deficiency, two law-making options are available. The first is for the judiciary to develop or change private law principles and rules in order to provide protection for the implicated constitutional norm. The second is for the judiciary to enforce an obligation upon Parliament to enact legislation to amend or replace existing private law rights and obligations so as to safeguard the norm against interference from a private individual or entity. The former is the more conventional option, but, in recent years, the law reports record an increasing reliance on the legislative duty to protect constitutional right norms in private legal relationships. The thesis investigates the extent to which the latter phenomenon - which will be described as a 'pivot towards legislative remedies' - exists, and the circumstances in which the courts pivot towards legislative remedies rather than developing private law of their own accord. The thesis finds that legislative schemes that give effect to constitutional rights are likely to contain an array of benefits that are absent from or reduced in the judicial law-making process. The judicial pivot towards legislative remedies is thus a strategy to enhance the process through which conflicting rights are resolved, as it allows for the constitutional rebuilding of private law in a way that the judiciary is unable to do on its own. Importantly, however, theories of judicial deference do not explain the pivot. On the contrary, the courts have exercised a strict level of control over the legislative law-making pathway. Through either statutory interpretation or the review of legislation, the courts require legislation to contain the essentials of the judicial law-making framework. From this perspective, the judicial law-making process produces the floor of the rebuilding project and the legislative law-making process enhances that framework.