Il principio di continuità nel diritto amministrativo

Il presente lavoro si propone principalmente di fornire un’analisi delle declinazioni assunte dal principio di continuità nel diritto amministrativo, tentando di metterne in luce al contempo le basi fondanti che caratterizzano ogni principio generale e le sfumature più attuali emerse dall’elaborazione della dottrina e della giurisprudenza più recenti. Partendo dal fondamentale presupposto secondo cui la maggior parte degli interpreti si è interessata al principio di continuità in campo amministrativo con prevalente riferimento all’ambito organizzativo-strutturale, si è tentato di estendere l’analisi sino a riconoscervi una manifestazione di principi chiave della funzione amministrativa complessivamente intesa quali efficienza, buon andamento, realizzazione di buoni risultati. La rilevanza centrale della continuità discende dalla sua infinita declinabilità, ma in questo lavoro si insiste particolarmente sul fatto che di essa possono darsi due fondamentali interpretazioni, tra loro fortemente connesse, che si influenzano reciprocamente: a quella che la intende come segno di stabilità perenne, capace di assicurare certezza sul modus operandi delle pubbliche amministrazioni e tutela degli affidamenti da esse ingenerati, si affianca una seconda visione che ne privilegia invece l’aspetto dinamico, interpretandola come il criterio che impone alla P.A. di assecondare la realtà che muta, evolvendo contestualmente ad essa, al fine di assicurare la permanenza del risultato utile per la collettività, in ossequio alla sua missione di cura. In questa prospettiva, il presente lavoro si propone di analizzare, nella sua prima parte, i risultati già raggiunti dall’elaborazione esegetica in materia di continuità amministrativa, con particolare riferimento alle sue manifestazioni nel campo dell’organizzazione e dell’attività amministrative, nonché ad alcune sue espressioni concrete nel settore degli appalti e dei servizi pubblici. La seconda parte è invece dedicata a fornire alcuni spunti ed ipotesi per nuove interpretazioni del principio in chiave sistematica, in relazione a concetti generali quali il tempo, lo spazio e il complessivo disegno progettuale della funzione amministrativa.

Il principio di consensualita' e la tutela dell'interesse pubblico nel governo del territorio. Un'analisi comparata

La tesi di dottorato ha ad oggetto il principio di consensualità nell’agere amministrativo, inteso quale principio generale dell’ordinamento, che regola un’azione della Pubblica amministrazione di necessità funzionalizzata al perseguimento dell’interesse pubblico. E’ pertanto sull’oscillazione problematica tra un rapporto duale e dicotomico, che ricorre tra la dimensione bilaterale dell’uso di moduli negoziali pubblico-privati aventi ad oggetto l’esercizio del potere pubblico, e la prospettiva generale e collettiva che sottintende la cura dell’interesse pubblico, che si riflette nell’elaborato. Materia di studio prescelta è, poi, il governo del territorio, settore dell’ordinamento ove più diffusamente si concludono accordi amministrativi tra Pubblica amministrazione e privati. In particolare, l’analisi è rivolta allo studio delle tanto nuove quanto problematiche fattispecie denominate accordi “a monte” delle prescrizioni urbanistiche, che rappresentano l’espressione più alta, al momento, del principio di consensualità. I problemi di ammissibilità giuridica posti da una parte della dottrina hanno richiesto una ricerca di un possibile fondamento positivo espresso per gli accordi “a monte”, anche al fine di mettere al riparo le leggi regionali che li disciplinano, da eventuali dubbi di legittimità costituzionale. Tale ricerca è stata condotta anche attraverso l’ausilio del diritto comparato. E’ così, stato possibile riscontrare anzitutto l’esistenza del principio di consensualità in un numero considerevole di Paesi, salve alcune eccezioni, alla cui analisi è stato dedicato ampio spazio di trattazione (in particolare, la Francia). Per altro verso, le analoghe esperienze giuridiche provenienti da altri Stati europei (in particolare, la Spagna) sono state d’ausilio per la finale elaborazione di un possibile modello di procedimento per la conclusione degli accordi “a monte”; mentre la constatazione di comuni giustificazioni dottrinali ha permesso l’elaborazione di una nuova possibile natura giuridica da riconoscere agli accordi in parola (accordi normativi) e la definizione di precise ricadute pratiche e giuridiche quanto al rapporto.

Quantifying the Economics of Medical Malpractice - A View from a Civil Law Perspective

Life is full of uncertainties. Legal rules should have a clear intention, motivation and purpose in order to diminish daily uncertainties. However, practice shows that their consequences are complex and hard to predict. For instance, tort law has the general objectives of deterring future negligent behavior and compensating the victims of someone else's negligence. Achieving these goals are particularly difficult in medical malpractice cases. To start with, when patients search for medical care they are typically sick in the first place. In case harm materializes during the treatment, it might be very hard to assess if it was due to substandard medical care or to the patient's poor health conditions. Moreover, the practice of medicine has a positive externality on the society, meaning that the design of legal rules is crucial: for instance, it should not result in physicians avoiding practicing their activity just because they are afraid of being sued even when they acted according to the standard level of care. The empirical literature on medical malpractice has been developing substantially in the past two decades, with the American case being the most studied one. Evidence from civil law tradition countries is more difficult to find. The aim of this thesis is to contribute to the empirical literature on medical malpractice, using two civil law countries as a case-study: Spain and Italy. The goal of this thesis is to investigate, in the first place, some of the consequences of having two separate sub-systems (administrative and civil) coexisting within the same legal system, which is common in civil law tradition countries with a public national health system (such as Spain, France and Portugal). When this holds, different procedures might apply depending on the type of hospital where the injury took place (essentially whether it is a public hospital or a private hospital). Therefore, a patient injured in a public hospital should file a claim in administrative courts while a patient suffering an identical medical accident should file a claim in civil courts. A natural question that the reader might pose is why should both administrative and civil courts decide medical malpractice cases? Moreover, can this specialization of courts influence how judges decide medical malpractice cases? In the past few years, there was a general concern with patient safety, which is currently on the agenda of several national governments. Some initiatives have been taken at the international level, with the aim of preventing harm to patients during treatment and care. A negligently injured patient might present a claim against the health care provider with the aim of being compensated for the economic loss and for pain and suffering. In several European countries, health care is mainly provided by a public national health system, which means that if a patient harmed in a public hospital succeeds in a claim against the hospital, public expenditures increase because the State takes part in the litigation process. This poses a problem in a context of increasing national health expenditures and public debt. In Italy, with the aim of increasing patient safety, some regions implemented a monitoring system on medical malpractice claims. However, if properly implemented, this reform shall also allow for a reduction in medical malpractice insurance costs. This thesis is organized as follows. Chapter 1 provides a review of the empirical literature on medical malpractice, where studies on outcomes and merit of claims, costs and defensive medicine are presented. Chapter 2 presents an empirical analysis of medical malpractice claims arriving to the Spanish Supreme Court. The focus is on reversal rates for civil and administrative decisions. Administrative decisions appealed by the plaintiff have the highest reversal rates. The results show a bias in lower administrative courts, which tend to focus on the State side. We provide a detailed explanation for these results, which can rely on the organization of administrative judges career. Chapter 3 assesses predictors of compensation in medical malpractice cases appealed to the Spanish Supreme Court and investigates the amount of damages attributed to patients. The results show horizontal equity between administrative and civil decisions (controlling for observable case characteristics) and vertical inequity (patients suffering more severe injuries tend to receive higher payouts). In order to execute these analyses, a database of medical malpractice decisions appealed to the Administrative and Civil Chambers of the Spanish Supreme Court from 2006 until 2009 (designated by the Spanish Supreme Court Medical Malpractice Dataset (SSCMMD)) has been created. A description of how the SSCMMD was built and of the Spanish legal system is presented as well. Chapter 4 includes an empirical investigation of the effect of a monitoring system for medical malpractice claims on insurance premiums. In Italy, some regions adopted this policy in different years, while others did not. The study uses data on insurance premiums from Italian public hospitals for the years 2001-2008. This is a significant difference as most of the studies use the insurance company as unit of analysis. Although insurance premiums have risen from 2001 to 2008, the increase was lower for regions adopting a monitoring system for medical claims. Possible implications of this system are also provided. Finally, Chapter 5 discusses the main findings, describes possible future research and concludes.

Governo, strutture e trasformazioni nel sistema universitario

L’elaborato costituisce la fase di approfondimento conclusivo del lavoro scientifico svolto negli anni precedenti. In quest’ottica, a circa tre anni dalla sua entrata in vigore, esso risulta prevalentemente incentrato sull’analisi delle principali innovazioni imposte dalla legge 30 dicembre 2010, n . 240, recante "Norme in materia di organizzazione delle università, di personale accademico e reclutamento, nonché delega al Governo per incentivare la qualità e l'efficienza del sistema universitario", nel tentativo di individuare quali soluzioni ,più o meno differenziate in base alle specificità delle diverse realtà, gli atenei italiani abbiano prefigurato mediante la revisione dei propri statuti, organi e strutture, al fine di rispettare ed attuare il dettato legislativo e non comprimere i propri spazi di autonomia. Contemporaneamente, esso approfondisce l’orientamento della giurisprudenza amministrativa in materia, la quale proprio nel corso di quest’anno ha avuto più di un’occasione di pronunciarsi in merito, per effetto dell’impugnazione ministeriale di molti dei nuovi statuti di autonomia. Infine, non viene tralasciata l’analisi dei profili e aspetti del sistema universitario italiano non intaccati dal cambiamento, ai fini del loro coordinamento con quelli riformati, cercando di percorrere parallelamente più strade: dalla ricognizione e lo studio dei più autorevoli contributi che la dottrina ha recentemente elaborato in materia, all’inquadramento delle scelte effettuate in sede di attuazione dai singoli atenei, anche alla luce dei decreti applicativi emanati. Il tutto al fine di individuare, anche grazie a studi di tipo comparato, con particolare riferimento all’ordinamento spagnolo, nuove soluzioni per il sistema universitario che, senza la pretesa di giungere a percorsi di cambiamento validamente applicabili per tutti gli atenei, possano risultare utili alla definizione di principi e modelli base, nel pieno rispetto del dettato costituzionale e dei parametri individuati a livello europeo con il processo di Bologna e la strategia di Lisbona.

The Law and Economics of Hedge Fund Regulation: A Comparison between the U.S. and the EU

This doctoral dissertation seeks to assess and address the potential contribution of the hedge fund industry to financial instability. In so doing, the dissertation investigates three main questions. What are the contributions of hedge funds to financial instability? What is the optimal regulatory strategy to address the potential contribution of hedge funds to financial instability? And do new regulations in the U.S. and the EU address the contribution of hedge funds to financial instability? With respect to financial stability concerns, it is argued that despite their benefits, hedge funds can contribute to financial instability. Hedge funds’ size and leverage, their interconnectedness with Large Complex Financial Institutions (LCFIs), and the likelihood of herding behavior in the industry can potentially undermine financial stability. Nonetheless, the data on hedge funds’ size and leverage suggest that these features are far from being systemically important. In contrast, the empirical evidence on the interconnectedness of hedge funds with LCFIs and their herding behavior is mixed. Based on these findings, the thesis focuses on one particular aspect of hedge fund regulation: direct vs. indirect regulation. In this respect, a major contribution of the thesis to the literature consists in the explicit discussion of the relationships between hedge funds and other market participants. Specifically, the thesis locates the domain of the indirect regulation in the inter-linkages between hedge funds and prime brokers. Accordingly, the thesis argues that the indirect regulation is likely to address the contribution of hedge funds to systemic risk without compromising their benefits to financial markets. The thesis further conducts a comparative study of the regulatory responses to the potential contribution of hedge funds to financial instability through studying the EU Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMD) and the hedge fund-related provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

Fighting corruption with pyramids: A Law and Economics approach to combating corruption in post-socialist countries

Corruption is, in the last two decades, considered as one of the biggest problems within the international community, which harms not only a particular state or society but the whole world. The discussion on corruption in law and economics approach is mainly run under the veil of Public choice theory and principal-agent model. Based on this approach the strong international initiatives taken by the UN, the OECD and the Council of Europe, provided various measures and tools in order to support and guide countries in their combat against corruption. These anti-corruption policies created a repression -prevention-transparency model for corruption combat. Applying this model, countries around the world adopted anti-corruption strategies as part of their legal rules. Nevertheless, the recent researches on the effects of this move show non impressive results. Critics argue that “one size does not fit all” because the institutional setting of countries around the world varies. Among the countries which experience problems of corruption, even though they follow the dominant anti-corruption trends, are transitional, post-socialist countries. To this group belong the countries which are emerging from centrally planned to an open market economy. The socialist past left traces on institutional setting, mentality of the individuals and their interrelation, particularly in the domain of public administration. If the idiosyncrasy of these countries is taken into account the suggestion in this thesis is that in public administration in post-socialist countries, instead of dominant anti-corruption scheme repression-prevention-transparency, corruption combat should be improved through the implementation of a new one, structure-conduct-performance. The implementation of this model is based on three regulatory pyramids: anti-corruption, disciplinary anti-corruption and criminal anti-corruption pyramid. This approach asks public administration itself to engage in corruption combat, leaving criminal justice system as the ultimate weapon, used only for the very harmful misdeeds.

Credit-Default-Swaps and the 2008 Financial Crisis: An Inquiry into the Underlying Legal Origins and the European Union’s Regulatory Reforms

After the 2008 financial crisis, the financial innovation product Credit-Default-Swap (CDS) was widely blamed as the main cause of this crisis. CDS is one type of over-the-counter (OTC) traded derivatives. Before the crisis, the trading of CDS was very popular among the financial institutions. But meanwhile, excessive speculative CDSs transactions in a legal environment of scant regulation accumulated huge risks in the financial system. This dissertation is divided into three parts. In Part I, we discussed the primers of the CDSs and its market development, then we analyzed in detail the roles CDSs had played in this crisis based on economic studies. It is advanced that CDSs not just promoted the eruption of the crisis in 2007 but also exacerbated it in 2008. In part II, we asked ourselves what are the legal origins of this crisis in relation with CDSs, as we believe that financial instruments could only function, positive or negative, under certain legal institutional environment. After an in-depth inquiry, we observed that at least three traditional legal doctrines were eroded or circumvented by OTC derivatives. It is argued that the malfunction of these doctrines, on the one hand, facilitated the proliferation of speculative CDSs transactions; on the other hand, eroded the original risk-control legal mechanism. Therefore, the 2008 crisis could escalate rapidly into a global financial tsunami, which was out of control of the regulators. In Part III, we focused on the European Union’s regulatory reform towards the OTC derivatives market. In specific, EU introduced mandatory central counterparty clearing obligation for qualified OTC derivatives, and requires that all OTC derivatives shall be reported to a trade repository. It is observable that EU’s approach in re-regulating the derivatives market is different with the traditional administrative regulation, but aiming at constructing a new market infrastructure for OTC derivatives.