A equidade na indeminização dos danos não patrimoniais

This study examines the quantification of compensation for non-pecuniary damage, awarded by means of judicial decisions based on equity, and seeks to verify whether such calculation safeguards legal certainty and predictability when applying the law, as well as whether it observes the principles of proportionality and equality. Firstly, the limits for discretionary judgment permitted to the judge were determined, by evaluating the criteria established under the law. Then, by examining the grounds of the judicial decisions in cases that had been selected beforehand, this study sought to detect operation modes in concrete considerations of equity used by judges. The examination of the grounds on which these judicial decisions are based permitted the comprehension of the calculation method used in each case and the observation that the criteria of compensatory nature, such as the extent of the damage and the respective consequences, assumed a primary role. Despite discrepancies in viewpoints with regard to certain issues of law, the jurisprudence examined reveals that great care is taken to consider the solutions reached in similar cases, in an attempt to ensure that the different criteria applied in the quantification of compensation are given uniform relevance. The comparison of decisions, reported to cases with similar legal contours, did not reveal relevant discrepancies in the calculation criteria used, nor are they disproportionate regarding the amount of compensation awarded, which means that resorting to equity, in determining the compensation to be awarded due to nonpecuniary damage, does not jeopardize legal certainty or predictability when applying the law, and observes the principle of proportionality, which is anchored in the constitutional principle of equality. The study performed, led to the conclusion that the grounds on which judicial decisions are based, by itemising the elements which are taken into account and the criteria adopted by the judge, allow these to be taken into consideration in similar cases, contributing towards uniform interpretation and application of the law, ensuring legal certainty and predictability when resorting to equity while quantifying compensation.

O Ne bis in idem no Espaço de Liberdade, Segurança e Justiça e no Direito Europeu da Concorrência

Ne bis in idem, understood as a procedural guarantee in the EU assumes different features in the AFSJ and in european competition law. Despite having a common origin (being, in both sectors the result of the case law of the same jurisdictional organ) its components are quite distintic in each area of the integration. In the AFSJ, the content of bis and idem are broader and addressed at a larger protection of individuals. Its axiological ground is based on the freedom of movements and human dignity, whereas in european competition law its closely linked to defence rights of legal persons and the concept of criminal punishment of anticompetitive sanctions as interpreted by the ECHR´s jurisprudence. In european competition law, ne bis in idem is limited by the systemic framework of competition law and the need to ensure parallel application of both european and national laws. Nonetheless, the absence of a compulsory mechanism to allocate jurisdiction in the EU (both in the AFSJ and in the field of anti-trust law) demands a common axiological framework. In this context, ne bis in idem must be understood as a defence right based on equity and proportionality. As far as its international dimension is concerned, ne bis in idem also lacks an erga omnes effect and it is not considered to be a rule of ius cogens. Consequently, the model which the ECJ has built regarding the application of the ne bis in idem in transnational and supranational contexts should be replicated by other courts through cross fertilization, in order to internationalize that procedural guarantee and broaden its scope of application.