The dissertation examines the enforcement of monetary claims in cases of intellectual property rights infringement. It focuses on the Act n. 221/2006 Sb. on the enforcement of intellectual property and on the directive 2004/48/EC of the European parliament and of the Council. The main aim is to evaluate the extent of monetary claims especially with regard on possible overlap or mutual consumption of the claims.The second aim is the analysis of English terminology in relation to the nearest Czech equivalents. The dissertation uses methods of logic induction and abstraction and the international multilateral comparative method, where the use of language plays a crucial role. The exact method of modelling combined with mathematical game theory is used. The dissertation progressively explains terms and relevant enactments. It introduces existing ambiguities. It tries to clarify them by analysing the EU legislation, the implementations in different member states, the statutory and common law in the USA. Consecutively it focuses on unjust enrichment in English law, then in the USA and in the continental system, where this institute is set negatively -- as the unjustified enrichment. Within the whole thesis the analysis takes place in relation to intellectual property rights infringement. In the penultimate chapter, TRIPS and ACTA are compared with the directive 2004/48/EC to provide further explanations. The dissertation concludes that a parallel award of damages and infringer's profits theoretically is possible, when it is not a single flow of value which is concerned by the infringement. The dissertation negatively replies to the question if damages and infringer's profits may be awarded concurrently in two separate lump-sum amounts according to § 5 (2) or (3) of the Act n. 221/2006 Sb. The reason is that the rate of the royalty is applied to sales of the infringer. These sales relate to the unjust enrichment of the infringer. If damages were again calculated by applying the same rate to the same sales, that would be double recovery. But theoretically this possibility cannot be excluded. A real-world example is very hard to find, even in the non-lump-sum form. Collateral sales awarded with lost profit in US law may serve as one. From the EU documents it seems, that infringer's profits is equalled to unjust enrichment and that is translated as unjustified enrichment. But English theory distinguishes restitution of unjust enrichment and gain-based recovery for wrong, the latter encompassing the award of infringer's profits in the form of damages. The broader Czech notion of unjustified enrichment is not to be equalled to unjust enrichment in the pure English notion, because the former encompasses also intentional wrongs. With regard to the restitution of infringer's profits based on unjust enrichment, the intent plays a role. The broader notion of unjust enrichment relevant to intellectual property rights infringement is called interceptive unjust enrichment, where enrichment "from the property of the plaintiff" is at stake and it is also possible to claim profits gained by the infringement. Focus is on the enrichment "from the property", not on the wrong. The dissertation examines the terms "account of profits", apportionment of profits", "disgorgement" and impure negotiorum gestio with regard to intellectual property infringement. In several countries reasonable royalty is regarded as good measure of net gain from the infringement of intellectual property. When the infringement was not innocent or wilful, it's possible to claim not only the objective enrichment but also the subjective enrichment -- profits of the infringer. In Czech law, that is represented by the emoluments from the enrichment. The aim of the last chapter is to evaluate, in the context of the operation of other relevant elements of legal environment, the preventive function of the double royalty claim introduced by the Act n. 221/2006 Sb. By construing a game theory model and using simulation, the thesis concludes that in lower royalty intervals, where attorney's costs are a high burden, the effect of the double royalty is insignificant. Where "more significant infringements" are at stake, and the royalty passes a given frontier, the application of the double royalty heightens the preventive function of the Act. Those "more significant infringements" have two intervals -- with the highest effect of the double royalty and with the "stabilized effect of the double royalty". But overall, in cases of "more significant infringements", the application of the double represents a heightening of the preventive power by a third and fifth respectively, and this is true only in the case, where the prospective infringers would try to calculate the effect of their infringement before infringing.

No description available.

[pt] A presente dissertação tem como objetivo analisar a quantificação do lucro da intervenção, partindo da convicção de que a utilização indevida do direito de um terceiro não pode jamais ser um bom negócio. Inicialmente, será demonstrado que o enriquecimento sem causa é o instituto mais adequado para lidar com situações em que uma pessoa se beneficia injustamente à custa de outra. Serão minuciosamente analisados os critérios que precisam ser atendidos para que se caracterize esse tipo de enriquecimento, como o aumento patrimonial do interveniente, a obtenção da vantagem à custa de outrem, a ausência de justa causa e a subsidiariedade do instituto. Em seguida, serão explorados os métodos objetivos para calcular o valor que deve ser devolvido ao titular do direito violado, apontando a inaplicabilidade da teoria do duplo limite aos casos de lucro da intervenção, bem como as razões pelas quais os valores pagos a título de reparação de danos extrapatrimoniais não devem ser abatidos do montante a ser restituído. Sustenta-se, ainda, a inadequação de compensar o lucro com o dano dentro do contexto de enriquecimento sem causa. Por fim, será discutido o papel da boa-fé e da má-fé na conduta do interventor, onde o trabalho explorará as divergências na doutrina sobre o tema, concluindo que se o interventor age de boa-fé deve restituir o valor de mercado da vantagem obtida e o lucro da intervenção deve ser repartido entre o interventor e o titular de direito, de forma proporcional à contribuição de cada um. Quanto à má-fé, conclui-se que, além do valor devido pelo uso do bem, o interventor deve restituir todo o lucro obtido com a intervenção. Essa abordagem proporcionará uma análise detalhada dos aspectos legais e éticos envolvidos na quantificação do lucro da intervenção, contribuindo para uma compreensão mais profunda do tema no contexto do Direito brasileiro. / [en] This dissertation aims to analyze the quantification of the disgorgement of profits, based on the conviction that the improper use of a third party s right can never be a good deal. Initially, it will be demonstrated that unjust enrichment is the most appropriate institute for dealing with situations in which one person benefits unfairly at the expense of another. The criteria that need to be met in order to characterize this type of enrichment will be thoroughly analyzed, such as the increase in the intervening party s assets, obtaining the advantage at the expense of others, the absence of just cause and the subsidiarity of the institute. Next, objective methods will be explored to calculate the amount that must be returned to the holder of the violated right, pointing out the inapplicability of the double limit theory to cases of profit from intervention, as well as the reasons why the amounts paid as reparation of moral damages must not be deducted from the amount to be refunded. It is also argued that it is inappropriate to compensate profit for damage within the context of unjust enrichment. Finally, the role of good faith and bad faith in the intervenor s conduct will be discussed, where the work will explore the divergences in the doctrine on the subject, concluding that if the intervenor acts in good faith he must restore the market value of the advantage obtained and the profit from the intervention must be shared between the intervener and the right holder, in proportion to the contribution of each one. As for bad faith, it is concluded that, in addition to the amount due for the use of the asset, the intervener must refund all the profit obtained from the intervention. This approach will provide a detailed analysis of the legal and ethical aspects involved in quantifying the profit from the intervention, contributing to a deeper understanding of the topic in the context of Brazilian Law.

La notion de déni de justice substantiel est problématique parce qu'elle suppose la reconnaissance de la responsabilité internationale de l'État pour ses décisions judiciaires nationales souveraines et donc le contrôle, par une juridiction internationale, de l'application discrétionnaire du droit interne par les autorités de justice nationales. Attachée à la notion de déni de justice en droit coutumier et historiquement liée à une conception assez large, et controversée, de la protection due par les États aux étrangers sur leur territoire, la notion de déni de justice substantiel doit encore affirmer son emprise en droit international conventionnel, non seulement dans le domaine de la protection des investissements internationaux mais aussi, et surtout, dans le domaine de la protection des droits de l'homme parce que l’enjeu, dans ce domaine, est particulièrement important et que la question s’y pose avec le plus d'acuité. Outre l'étude de la notion coutumière et son affirmation comme forme de déni de justice, l'intérêt de cette étude est de faire ressortir l'existence d'un droit général et subjectif au jugement raisonnable, dont la définition permet de mettre en avant les limites du pouvoir normatif que la mise en oeuvre d'un standard attribue au juge international lorsqu'il contrôle la régularité interne des jugements nationaux. / The notion of substantial denial of justice is problematic because it assumes the recognition of the international responsibility of the State in its judicial national sovereign decisions and thus the review, by an international jurisdiction, of the discretionary application of internal law by national judicial authorities. Attached to the notion of denial of justice in customary law, and historically linked to a fairly large and controversial perception of the protection that is required from States to foreigners on their territories, the notion of substantial denial of justice must still assert its influence in international conventional law, not only in the field of international investment protection but also, and foremost, in the area of human rights protection, because the stakes in that field are particularly important and the questions they raise are more relevant. Besides the study of the customary notion and its assertion as a form of denial of justice, the main point of this study is to highlight the existence of a general and subjective right to reasonable judgment, of which the definition allows to point out the limits of the normative power that the implementation of a standard provides to an international judge when he is called upon to review the internal regularity of national judgments.

The doctoral thesis focuses on the part of criminal proceedings in which the court adjudicates the injured person's private claims which arose in connection with a criminal act (so-called collateral proceedings). The importance of collateral proceedings lies in the fact that by using it the injured party may avoid time-consuming, financially as well as procedurally demanding civil proceedings. However, the institute of collateral proceedings comprises a number of specific issues since a criminal court adjudicates the private claims of the injured party in compliance with substantive law rules being outside of the scope of criminal law (mainly civil law and labour law regulations) but, still, within the framework of criminal proceedings. The basic source of the submitted thesis is the Czech legal order. However, it is not the only one taken into consideration. The doctoral thesis also contains comparative analysis of legal regulation of collateral proceedings from the point of view of the German and Swiss legal orders. Following the analysis of collateral proceedings de lege lata, as well as the comparison with foreign models I am submitting proposals for the improvement of legislation that could be used in connection with the planned recodification of the Czech Criminal Procedure.

Examines the character construction of the Hesiodic ‘farmer’ in the scholarship of Works and Days. Questions Hesiod’s intimacy of agricultural knowledge: was he a practical farmer or a non-farming poet? Using my farming experience I question the adequacy of the information in Works and Days for use as a farming manual. Lines 635-640 - Hesiod’s description of the climatic conditions of Ascra in respect to farming are set against soil properties (soil biochemistry as an evaluating tool) and agricultural responses (farming methods of other cultures) shows Hesiod to have little grasp of the farming methods each situation requires. Text comparatives: Fan Shêng-Chih Shu an ancient Chinese agricultural text detailed with attention to soil fertility. Supporting ancient texts: Cato on Agriculture, Columella on Agriculture, Theophrastus on Plants, Xenophon Oeconomics and Homer’s Odyssey for references to dung and soil fertility. The vague farming information suggests a non-personalized experience - the Hesiodic ‘farmer’ is probably not a practical farmer at all.

Examines the character construction of the Hesiodic ‘farmer’ in the scholarship of Works and Days. Questions Hesiod’s intimacy of agricultural knowledge: was he a practical farmer or a non-farming poet? Using my farming experience I question the adequacy of the information in Works and Days for use as a farming manual. Lines 635-640 - Hesiod’s description of the climatic conditions of Ascra in respect to farming are set against soil properties (soil biochemistry as an evaluating tool) and agricultural responses (farming methods of other cultures) shows Hesiod to have little grasp of the farming methods each situation requires. Text comparatives: Fan Shêng-Chih Shu an ancient Chinese agricultural text detailed with attention to soil fertility. Supporting ancient texts: Cato on Agriculture, Columella on Agriculture, Theophrastus on Plants, Xenophon Oeconomics and Homer’s Odyssey for references to dung and soil fertility. The vague farming information suggests a non-personalized experience - the Hesiodic ‘farmer’ is probably not a practical farmer at all.

The thesis deals with monetary remedies in intellectual property infringement suits, focusing on industrial property rights. On the background of enacting of the czech Act number 221/2006 Sb. which implements the directive 2004/48/EC of the European parliament and of the Council, the thesis compares these two texts with each other and also with the proposal for the directive KOM(2003) 46 final in their relevant parts. By doing this, it evaluates the directive and the czech act as the directive's implementation. This evaluation represents the secondary aims of the thesis. Comparison, analysis of factual articles and interviews with relevant experts practicising in the area show that by setting the damages as double the "customary" royalties, the czech Act in his § 5 ods. 2 represents a sanction, which confirms the hypothesis of the prevailance of an analogy between the czech provison and the punitive damages in american law. This fact creates scope for the hypothesis of existance of further analogies, the verification of which is the central aim of the thesis. Therefore, the second part of the thesis analyzes american provisions of the United States Code concerning copyright, trademark and patent law, and related caselaw. This is compared both to the directive and the proposal for it, moreover to the czech copyright Act number 121/2000 Sb. and in particular to the czech Act number 221/2006 Sb. The third part supplements the analysis of relevant czech court decisions. The second and third part identify similar and distinct elements of the provisions and reveal analogies in seemingly different institutes. Differences are spotted in the construct used to achieve the punitive function, furthermore between the terms "customary royalty" and "reasonable royalty" and also between the terms "bezdôvodné obohatenie", "infringer's profits" and "unjust enrichment". Conversely, an analogy is identified between the discretionary power of american courts to increase proven damages or determine statutory damages and the czech institute of "primerané zadosťučinenie" (appropriate satisfaction). The prevailance of prohibition of double recovery is another existing analogy between the american and czech law.

La subrogation est un mode privilégié de transmission des créances en assurance maritime. Elle met en présence les principaux acteurs du commerce maritime : l'assuré, l'assureur et le tiers responsable. La subrogation de l'assureur maritime a toujours bénéficié d'une faveur particulière se traduisant par la souplesse des textes juridiques aussi bien pour la subrogation légale qui s'exerce de plein droit par le seul fait de la loi, que pour la subrogation conventionnelle qui procède de la volonté des parties. Cependant, face aux exigences procédurales des juridictions, le contentieux de la subrogation tend davantage vers un durcissement. Dès lors, la question se pose de savoir s'il existe d'autres alternatives pour l'assureur maritime ? Le recours à l'arbitrage constitue une bonne solution au regard de la souplesse des sentences rendues en la matière. Aussi, la jurisprudence judiciaire fait état d'une grande évolution qui porterait les assureurs vers des moyens de droit commun, entre autres, la cession de créance, la répétition de l'indû et l'action "de in rem verso" pour pallier l'incertitude du contentieux de la subrogation. Sur le plan du droit international privé, il n'y a pas de règle spécifique à la subrogation de l'assureur maritime. Mais, les Règlements Rome I et Rome II édictent des mécanismes de conflits de lois applicables aux relations contractuelles et extra contractuelles. Ils désignent la loi qui régit la subrogation / Subrogation is a privileged mode of transmission of claims in marine insurance. It brings together key players in the maritime trade: the insured, the insurer and the third party responsible. Subrogation of the underwriter has always enjoyed a special favor resulting flexibility of legal texts both for subrogation exerted automatically by the fact of the law, for contractual subrogation which proceeds the will of the parties. However, faced with the procedural requirements of the courts, litigation of subrogation tends more toward a cure. Therefore, the question arises of whether if there are other alternatives to the underwriter? The arbitration is a good solution in terms of the flexibility of awards made in the matter. Also, judicial jurisprudence reported a great change that would insurers to ordinary means, among other things, the assignment, the repetition of the undue and action "de in rem verso" to overcome the uncertainty of litigation of subrogation. In terms of private international law, there is no specific rule of subrogation of the marine insurer. However, the Regulations Rome I and Rome II enact conflict mechanisms applicable to contractual and extra-contractual. They designate the law that governs subrogation

This thesis aims to study how Hezbollah acted just or unjustly in the 2006 Lebanon War to conclude if their warfare was just or unjust. That leads to a better understanding of Hezbollah's warfare in the 2006 Lebanon War and if they thereby have culpability in the war. If Hezbollah want to be taken as a serious and legitimate force in war, they should be held accountable to the same standards of warfare as states and be shown that there are consequences for their actions. The theory that will be used in order to do so, is the Just War theory. It is divided into two categories: Jus ad Bellum, the right to go to war, and Jus in Bello, the right conduct in war. Hezbollah seemed to have failed to meet the criteria of Jus ad Bellum, by failing to fulfill the criteria just cause, right intention, the proportionality of ends, and a reasonable prospect of success. They only managed to fulfill the criterion of right authority and mostly the last resort criterion, due to their constitutional right to wage war and their prior intents of a prisoner exchange. The organization also failed to meet the criteria of Jus in Bello: proportionality of means and discrimination. They had no proportionality regarding the goal, nor did they differentiate between military goals and civilians. It was therefore concluded that Hezbollah acted unjustly in the 2006 Lebanon War, by not having the right to go to war, but also because the conduct in the war was unjust as well. That contributed to the more significant understanding of Hezbollah's warfare in the 2006 Lebanon War including its culpability, and the importance of holding them accountable for their actions in war. / Krishantering och säkerhet