Este trabalho trata da relação entre a teoria formalista do direito elaborada por Ernest Weinrib e sua teoria de fundamentação da responsabilidade civil derivada do formalismo. O objetivo do trabalho é mostrar que, apesar de o formalismo apresentar uma formulação distintiva e inovadora de racionalidade jurídica, que enfatiza a relação entre forma e conteúdo do direito, o modelo de racionalidade jurídica do formalismo não fornece uma explicação adequada para algumas áreas do direito e, especificamente no caso da responsabilidade civil, da responsabilidade objetiva, que, nessa visão, é considerada um erro jurídico. O formalismo jurídico weinribiano é um projeto teórico ambicioso que a um só tempo procura rechaçar posições céticas como os estudos críticos do direito (critical legal studies) e posições instrumentalistas, especialmente a análise econômica do direito e o positivismo jurídico. Ele apresenta uma teoria geral que mostra o direito como um lócus de racionalidade moral imanente e um método, fundado na inteligibilidade imanente, para compreender essa racionalidade e ver o direito como um fenômeno autônomo em relação à política e a outras esferas de racionalidade. O método formalista permite a intelecção do direito como um fenômeno imanentemente coerente por meio da apreensão das estruturas organizadoras e justificadoras implícitas nos arranjos jurídicos, isto é, as formas da justiça corretiva e da justiça distributiva. Com base nisso, o formalismo sustenta que a forma imanente ao direito privado e, consequentemente, à responsabilidade civil é a justiça corretiva. Este trabalho reconstrói criticamente as principais teses que integram o formalismo e que são fundamentais para entender a rejeição à responsabilidade objetiva, considerada uma monstruosidade conceitual, com especial ênfase na premissa epistemológica formalista da inteligibilidade imanente como a melhor maneira de se compreender o direito e na premissa da coerência estrutural que os arranjos jurídicos devem apresentar. A tese discute o modo como o formalismo jurídico se insere no debate metodológico contemporâneo, definindo o formalismo jurídico como uma teoria de avaliação e justificação jurídica e, portanto, dotada de uma dimensão prescritiva, e apresentando o impacto dessa definição na postura que o formalismo assume em relação à responsabilidade objetiva. A tese ainda analisa a relação entre essa dimensão prescritiva e o posicionamento do formalismo em relação à responsabilidade objetiva, rotulando-a de erro jurídico, e conclui com uma discussão sobre as razões desse posicionamento que, argumentase, é equivocado , que se baseiam na assunção das premissas da inteligibilidade imanente e do critério de coerência estrita que marcam o método de conhecimento formalista. / This dissertation focuses on the relationship between juridical formalism as elaborated by Ernest Weinrib and his theory of the foundation of tort law. The dissertation argues that despite formalisms distinctive and innovative account of legal rationality that emphasizes the relationship between laws form and substance, this account does not provide an adequate explanation for specific areas of law. Particularly in the case of tort law it does not adequately explain strict liability, which is deemed a juridical error. Weinribs juridical formalism is an ambitious theoretical project that challenges: skeptical accounts of law, such as critical legal studies; instrumentalists account of law exemplified by economical analysis of law; and juridical positivism. Weinribs theory attempts to explain law as a locus of immanent moral rationality. The theory is based on a methodology that adopts the premise of immanent intelligibility as a way to comprehend this rationality. This approach allows the theorist to grasp law as a phenomenon autonomous from politics and other spheres of rationality. The formalist method allows the intelligibility of law as an immanently coherent phenomenon through the apprehension of the organizing and justifying structures implicit in juridical arrangements, i.e., the forms of corrective justice and distributive justice with which formalism argues that the immanent form of private law and, therefore, of tort law is corrective justice. This dissertation reconstructs critically the main theses that support formalism, which are essential to understanding its rejection of strict liability considered a conceptual monstrosity. This dissertation focuses on the formalist epistemological assumption of immanent intelligibility as the best way of comprehending law and on the premise of internal structural coherence that juridical arrangements should display. This thesis discusses the way in which juridical formalism can be located within the contemporary methodological debate, and defines formalism as an evaluative and justificatory juridical theory. As such, formalism encompasses a prescriptive dimension. This dissertation also identifies how the definition of formalism as a prescriptive theory impacts on its analysis of strict liability. The dissertation then analyses the relationship between this prescriptive dimension and the formalist position regarding strict liability. It concludes that formalisms mistake regarding strict liability can be traced back to its epistemological assumptions regarding immanent intelligibility and coherence.

L'article 111-4 du Code pénal prévoit, par une formule laconique, que « la loi pénale est d'interprétation stricte ». Corollaire de la légalité criminelle, ce principe a vocation à protéger les individus des risques d'une répression arbitraire en soumettant toute atteinte à leur liberté au strict domaine de la loi, expression de la volonté générale. À dépasser les désaccords entourant les théories de l'interprétation, analysée comme un procédé de révélation ou de construction de sens, cet impératif intervient a minima comme une limite à la liberté de l'interprète. Or le principe de légalité dans lequel l'exigence tire son fondement a subi d'importantes mutations. L'admission de la représentation, l'inflation législative, et l'instrumentalisation de la fonction intimidatrice de la norme pénale, ont en effet entraîné une certaine déliquescence de la loi. L'instauration de contrôles de constitutionnalité et de conventionnalité de la loi participent à ce mouvement. Par un effet de balancier, le recul de la loi s'est traduit par une recrudescence du pouvoir judiciaire. Chargée de contrôler la conventionnalité de la loi et les conditions de renvoi d'une question prioritaire de constitutionnalité, la chambre criminelle a vu son office profondément modifié. La protection effective de la liberté individuelle est dorénavant réputée être mieux assurée par le contrôle judiciaire des normes pénales que par le recours à la loi : la légalité formelle se mue en une légalité matérielle. Or, en qualité de corollaire de la légalité criminelle, le principe d'interprétation stricte est nécessairement atteint par cette mutation. Bien que demeurant pareillement formulé, il voit en effet son fondement substantiellement modifié. L'exigence d'une stricte interprétation étant originellement justifiée par déférence à l'égard de la volonté générale exprimée par la loi, la reconnaissance de l'incapacité de cette dernière à la saisir entraîne une certaine souplesse dans l'application du principe. Dès lors qu'il est compétent pour contrôler la loi, le juge est par ailleurs davantage enclin à se libérer de son emprise. Il convient alors de s'interroger sur la manière dont la chambre criminelle applique le principe d'interprétation stricte de la loi pénale à l'aune des mutations de la légalité. Il apparaît que, sans suivre une ligne de conduite précise, la chambre criminelle tend à influer sur la politique pénale en usant de son pouvoir d'interprétation pour réajuster, de manière conjoncturelle et par touches d'ajustements ponctuels, le seuil de la répression fixé par le législateur. Dans un système de hiérarchie des normes se transformant en réseau normatif, l'interprétation devient outil de construction de la norme pénale. / Article 111-4 of the Penal Code succinctly provides that “criminal law is to be interpreted strictly”. Deriving from the principle of legality, the principle of strict construction intends to protect individuals from arbitrary repression by submitting any infringement on their freedom to the strict scope of the law, which is the expression of the general will. Setting aside the disagreements regarding the theory of interpretation – analyzed as a method of either revealing or constructing meaning – this imperative, at least, limits the interpreter's freedom. However, the principle of legality, on which the imperative of strict construction is based, has undergone significant changes. The adoption of a representative system, legislative inflation, along with authorities taking advantage of the deterrence provided by criminal norms has, to a degree, led to a decline of the law. The establishment of constitutionality and conventionality reviews of the law has also contributed to it. As a result of a seesaw effect, the decline of the law resulted in an increase in the role of the judiciary. The Criminal Division of the French Supreme Court of Appeal (Court de Cassation) is responsible for reviewing the conventionality of the law and the referral procedure of preliminary rulings on constitutionality. Consequently, the Criminal Division's function has undergone major changes. Protecting individual freedom is now deemed more effective when carried out by the judicial review of criminal norms rather than by resorting to the law. Procedural legality turns into substantive legality. Therefore, as a result of the principle of legality, the principle of strict construction is affected by this transformation. Even though the principle of strict construction remains formulated in the same way, its founding principle has substantially changed. The requirement of a strict construction was originally justified out of deference for the general will, which is expressed by the law. Thus, the acknowledgement of the law's incapacity to grasp the general will leads to some flexibility in the implementation of the principle. Since the judge has the authority to review the law, he is more inclined to interpret it freely. How the Criminal Division implements the principle of strict construction of criminal law in light of changes in legality needs then to be examined: The Criminal Division tends to influence criminal policies, even though it does not seem to be following a particular course of action, by exercising its power of interpretation to adjust, as circumstances dictate, the threshold for punishment set by the legislator. In a normative hierarchy system that turns into a normative network, interpretation becomes a tool to construct criminal norms.

Trata-se de dissertação de mestrado acadêmico cujo problema de pesquisa consiste na identificação de soluções e respectivos fundamentos jurídicos para a reparação do dano sofrido pelo genitor aparente que é indevidamente obrigado ao pagamento de alimentos, considerando tratar-se de verba irrepetível. Foi utilizado como método de abordagem o hipotético-dedutivo e como métodos de procedimento o monográfico e o histórico. O trabalho foi dividido em três capítulos. O primeiro capítulo foi destinado ao aprofundamento do estudo da obrigação alimentar, com abordagem da evolução histórica, características, classificações, pressupostos, presunção de paternidade, alimentos gravídicos e, por fim, a identificação do dano consubstanciado na constatação da imposição do dever alimentar a destinatário ilegítimo. O segundo capítulo propôs uma solução ideal, que consiste no dever de reparação do dano pelo genitor verdadeiro, analisando inicialmente a possibilidade de imputação de responsabilidade objetiva, mas concluindo, por fim, estar no enriquecimento sem causa o fundamento adequado. O terceiro capítulo apresentou soluções subsidiárias, para o caso de desconhecimento do genitor verdadeiro, buscando imputar o dever de reparação à genitora que age culposamente ao indicar o alimentante errado em juízo. Para tanto, quatro possíveis fundamentos foram cogitados: enriquecimento sem causa, abuso de direito e responsabilidades civis subjetiva e objetiva, concluindo-se que, em todos os casos, haverá responsabilidade objetiva da genitora guardiã ou gestante, embora ainda impositiva a irrepetibilidade quando presente a boa-fé da agente. / This is an academic master's thesis which research problem consists in the identification of solutions and respective legal grounds for the relief of the damage suffered by the apparent parent who is improperly required to pay for the child support, considering that it is an unrepeatable sum. It was used as method of approach the hypothetical-deductive one and as method of procedure the monographic and historical ones. The work was divided in three chapters. The first chapter aimed the deepening of the study of child support obligation, with an approach to historical evolution, characteristics, classifications, assumptions, presumption of paternity, child support during pregnancy, and, finally, the identification of the damage consubstantiated in the obligation of the imposition of paying the child support to an illegitimate child. The second chapter proposed a idealsolution, consisting of the obligation to repair the damage by the true parent, which initially examined the possibility of imputation of strict liability, but finally concluded that unjust enrichment was the appropriate basis. The third chapter presented subsidiary solutions, in the case of ignorance of the true parent, seeking to impute the duty of reparation to the mother who acts guilty by indicating the wrong parent in court. In order to do so, four possible reasons have been considered: unjust enrichment, abuse of rights and liability and strict liability, and it is concluded that in all cases there will be strict liability of the female custodian or pregnant mother, although still impositive the unrepeatable when present the good faith of the agent.

Apresentamos uma caracterização das funções positivas definidas em esferas complexas, generalizando assim, um resultado de Schoenberg ([41]). Como no caso real, uma classe importante dessas funções é aquela composta pelas funções estritamente positivas definidas de uma certa ordem; estas podem ser utilizadas para resolver certos problemas de interpolação de dados arbitrários associados a pontos distintos distribuídos nas esferas. Com esse objetivo, obtivemos algumas condições necessárias e suficientes (separadamente) para que funções positivas definidas sejam estritamente positivas definidas. Os resultados apresentados fornecem uma caracterização final elementar para funções estritamente positivas definidas de todas as ordens em quase todas as esferas complexas. Funções estritamente positivas definidas de ordem 2 são caracterizadas em todas as esferas complexas. Analisamos também a relação entre funções estritamente positivas definidas em esferas complexas e funções estritamente positivas definidas em esferas reais. / We characterize positive definite functions on complex spheres, generalizing a famous result due to I. J. Schoenberg ([41]). As in the real case, we study the so-called strictly positive definite functions. They can be used to perform interpolation of scattered data on those spheres. We present (separated) necessary and sufficient conditions for a positive definite function to be strictly positive definite of a certain order. These conditions produce a final characterization for those positive definite functions which are strictly positive definite of all orders, on almost all spheres. Strictly positive definite functions of order 2 are identified. Finally, we study a connection between strictly positive definite functions on real spheres and strictly positive definite functions on complex spheres.

Este trabalho trata da relação entre a teoria formalista do direito elaborada por Ernest Weinrib e sua teoria de fundamentação da responsabilidade civil derivada do formalismo. O objetivo do trabalho é mostrar que, apesar de o formalismo apresentar uma formulação distintiva e inovadora de racionalidade jurídica, que enfatiza a relação entre forma e conteúdo do direito, o modelo de racionalidade jurídica do formalismo não fornece uma explicação adequada para algumas áreas do direito e, especificamente no caso da responsabilidade civil, da responsabilidade objetiva, que, nessa visão, é considerada um erro jurídico. O formalismo jurídico weinribiano é um projeto teórico ambicioso que a um só tempo procura rechaçar posições céticas como os estudos críticos do direito (critical legal studies) e posições instrumentalistas, especialmente a análise econômica do direito e o positivismo jurídico. Ele apresenta uma teoria geral que mostra o direito como um lócus de racionalidade moral imanente e um método, fundado na inteligibilidade imanente, para compreender essa racionalidade e ver o direito como um fenômeno autônomo em relação à política e a outras esferas de racionalidade. O método formalista permite a intelecção do direito como um fenômeno imanentemente coerente por meio da apreensão das estruturas organizadoras e justificadoras implícitas nos arranjos jurídicos, isto é, as formas da justiça corretiva e da justiça distributiva. Com base nisso, o formalismo sustenta que a forma imanente ao direito privado e, consequentemente, à responsabilidade civil é a justiça corretiva. Este trabalho reconstrói criticamente as principais teses que integram o formalismo e que são fundamentais para entender a rejeição à responsabilidade objetiva, considerada uma monstruosidade conceitual, com especial ênfase na premissa epistemológica formalista da inteligibilidade imanente como a melhor maneira de se compreender o direito e na premissa da coerência estrutural que os arranjos jurídicos devem apresentar. A tese discute o modo como o formalismo jurídico se insere no debate metodológico contemporâneo, definindo o formalismo jurídico como uma teoria de avaliação e justificação jurídica e, portanto, dotada de uma dimensão prescritiva, e apresentando o impacto dessa definição na postura que o formalismo assume em relação à responsabilidade objetiva. A tese ainda analisa a relação entre essa dimensão prescritiva e o posicionamento do formalismo em relação à responsabilidade objetiva, rotulando-a de erro jurídico, e conclui com uma discussão sobre as razões desse posicionamento que, argumentase, é equivocado , que se baseiam na assunção das premissas da inteligibilidade imanente e do critério de coerência estrita que marcam o método de conhecimento formalista. / This dissertation focuses on the relationship between juridical formalism as elaborated by Ernest Weinrib and his theory of the foundation of tort law. The dissertation argues that despite formalisms distinctive and innovative account of legal rationality that emphasizes the relationship between laws form and substance, this account does not provide an adequate explanation for specific areas of law. Particularly in the case of tort law it does not adequately explain strict liability, which is deemed a juridical error. Weinribs juridical formalism is an ambitious theoretical project that challenges: skeptical accounts of law, such as critical legal studies; instrumentalists account of law exemplified by economical analysis of law; and juridical positivism. Weinribs theory attempts to explain law as a locus of immanent moral rationality. The theory is based on a methodology that adopts the premise of immanent intelligibility as a way to comprehend this rationality. This approach allows the theorist to grasp law as a phenomenon autonomous from politics and other spheres of rationality. The formalist method allows the intelligibility of law as an immanently coherent phenomenon through the apprehension of the organizing and justifying structures implicit in juridical arrangements, i.e., the forms of corrective justice and distributive justice with which formalism argues that the immanent form of private law and, therefore, of tort law is corrective justice. This dissertation reconstructs critically the main theses that support formalism, which are essential to understanding its rejection of strict liability considered a conceptual monstrosity. This dissertation focuses on the formalist epistemological assumption of immanent intelligibility as the best way of comprehending law and on the premise of internal structural coherence that juridical arrangements should display. This thesis discusses the way in which juridical formalism can be located within the contemporary methodological debate, and defines formalism as an evaluative and justificatory juridical theory. As such, formalism encompasses a prescriptive dimension. This dissertation also identifies how the definition of formalism as a prescriptive theory impacts on its analysis of strict liability. The dissertation then analyses the relationship between this prescriptive dimension and the formalist position regarding strict liability. It concludes that formalisms mistake regarding strict liability can be traced back to its epistemological assumptions regarding immanent intelligibility and coherence.

大體上來說，高維列聯表通常比較不容易分析，因此我們考慮將某柴暫不列入探討之因子的次數相加，以便降低列聯表的維數。但是降低列聯表維數的過程必需相當慎重，以確保合併的過程不致影響到所欲探討之因子間的相關性。本文就 "sun-to-zero" 及 "set-to-zero" 兩種不同的對數線性模式參數之限制式，分別探討簡易合併(collapsibility)、嚴格合併(strict collapsibility)及強固合併(strong collapsibility)之充要條件，並舉例說明及印證這些條件。 / A lower-dimensional contingency is usually easier to understand than a higher-dimensional one. Collapsing a larger table into a smaller one so that the associations among a set of factors can be easier to explain, however, should be exercised with care. In this study, definitions of collapsibility, strict collapsibility, and strong collapsibility are viewed. Distinctions among the three are compared. Necessary and sufficient condittions for these three types of collapsibility under conventional "set-to-zero" and "sum-to-zero" constraints are discussed and proved.

No description available.

Boolean functions are the main building blocks of most cipher systems. Various aspects of their cryptological characteristics are examined and investigated by many researchers from different fields. This thesis has no claim to obtain original results but consists in an attempt at giving a unified survey of the main results of the subject. In this thesis, the theory of boolean functions is presented in details, emphasizing some important cryptological properties such as balance, nonlinearity, strict avalanche criterion and propagation criterion. After presenting many results about these criteria with detailed proofs, two upper bounds and two lower bounds on the nonlinearity of a boolean function due to Zhang and Zheng are proved. Because of their importance in the theory of boolean functions, construction of Sylvester-Hadamard matrices are shown and most of their properties used in cryptography are proved. The Walsh transform is investigated in detail by proving many properties. By using a property of Sylvester-Hadamard matrices, the fast Walsh transform is presented and its application in finding the nonlinearity of a boolean function is demonstrated. One of the most important classes of boolean functions, so called bent functions, are presented with many properties and by giving several examples, from the paper of Rothaus. By using bent functions, relations between balance, nonlinearity and propagation criterion are presented and it is shown that not all these criteria can be simultaneously satisfied completely. For this reason, several constructions of functions optimizing these criteria which are due to Seberry, Zhang and Zheng are presented.

This paper is mainly anchored in assemblies and parades handled by police agency¡¨. First of all, assemblies and parades are the basic human rights protected by our constitution. The purpose of the police¡¦s involvement in the handling of those activities is to safeguard citizens¡¦ exercise of their rights. Secondly, from analysis of practical cases and through verification of experimental activities and modification of theories, reasonable and proper principles of handling such activities can be submitted as a reference for policemen¡¦s law enforcement and education and training. Finally, the study discusses the contents and regulations of the Law of Parade and Demonstration. It also provides directions of modification of the law through theories and experiments in order to make the law more perfect, protect human rights granted by the constitution, and further inspire people¡¦s law-abiding spirit. From my practical experiences in handling assemblies and parades over the years in police organizations of basic level and this study, the author found that the cases of assemblies and parades in Kaohsiung City during the period from 2001 to 2005 were different in their types. Case-by-case analysis, examination of evidence and deductive method were adopted to examine if the police adhere to the principles of ¡§protecting lawful assemblies¡¨, ¡§banning unlawful assemblies, and ¡§imposing sanction against violence¡§, and if they take the positions of ¡§To rule by law¡¨, ¡§administrative neutrality¡¨ and ¡§strict enforcement of law¡¨ at the same time. If not, the results will turn out to be different. In recent years, people¡¦s political consciousness has been rising and the assertion of individual rights and interests has aroused more and more attention. Besides, the two-party system has almost taken shape in Taiwan. Consequently, assemblies and parades become normal in today¡¦s plural and diversified society. The police should know how to play the role of law enforcement and protector correctly. To achieve the goal, the policemen should accumulate their practical experiences and carry out case analysis continuously. By combining ¡§theories¡¨ with ¡§practices¡¨ together, this study reflects the advantages and disadvantages of the police in handling assemblies and parades at current stage, and point out the direction of amendment to the present Law of Parade and Demonstration. Finally, this study submits one set of concrete and feasible plan for the police agency to follow, and I hope that the plan will be helpful in handling assemblies and parades in the future.

Autorius pastebi, kad viena mažiausiai reglamentuotų deliktinės atsakomybės problemų, skyrium gyvenančio tėvo atsakomybės už nepilnamečio vaiko padarytą žalą problema. Būtent šis atvejis teisės aktuose reglamentuojamas mažai, jo taikymas problemiškas, kadangi bet koks sprendimas neišvengiamai gali būti pamatinių teisinės atsakomybės normų pažeidimu. Darbo tyrimui autorius iškelia šį tikslą ir uždavinius: Darbo objektas – skyrium gyvenančio ir neauginančio vaiko tėvo teisinės atsakomybės ribos. Hipotezė: Skyrium gyvenantis ir neauginantis vaiko tėvas neprivalo atsakyti už vaiko padarytą žalą.. Darbo tikslas- išanalizuoti skyrium gyvenančio ir vaiko neauginančio tėvo atsakomybės ribas. Uždaviniai: a)Išanalizuoti teisines doktrinas, reglamentuojančias tėvų atsakomybės ypatumus bendrosios teisės ir civilinės teisės sistemų valstybėse. b)Aptarti tėvo pareigą atlyginti vaiko padarytą žalą esant tėvo ir vaiko atskyrimo, tėvų valdžios apribojimo ir separacijos atvejams . c) Išanalizuoti teisės aktų nuostatas ,įtakojančias skyrium gyvenančio tėvo atsakomybę už nepilnamečio veiksmus. Aptardamas šią problemą, autorius analizuoja situaciją kitose šalyse .Bandoma nustatyti bendruosius dėsningumus bendrosios bei kontinentinės teisės sistemų valstybėse. Pastebima, kad bendrosios teisės sistemos valstybėse vienareikšmiškai galioja asmeninės atsakomybės principas. Tai yra tėvas kaltas tiek kiek jie tiesiogiai nusižengė ar prisidėjo prie to, kad žala būtų padaryta. Kontinentinės teisės... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Parental liability is one of the most problematical aspects of tort liability cases. In most lows in the world is written that both parents are liable for the damages made by their child. There is no information about individual liability of child’s father or mother. Especially this problem becomes important then parents live separately. Then we have a question is child’s father who does not live together with his child liable for the torts and minors made by his child. This problem becomes complicated when father did all he could to help his child to act legally. But on the other hand, if we presume that according these circumstances father is not liable, we can breach victims’ rights. Main rule of civil liability is damages compensation for the victim. This dilemma is important in our days because there is big number of juvenile crimes. Civil liability for juvenile crimes is taken by parents or institution which supervises the juvenile at the time when tort is made. Under these circumstances we need stronger regulation of subjects liability limits. The object of the work is liability limits of father who lives separately and does not take care about this child for the torts made by his child. Hypothesis: Father who lives separately and does not take care about this child is liable for the torts made by his child. Purpose of the work is to analyze the limits of liability of the father who lives separately and does not take care about his child. The following tasks are... [to full text]