A regulação diante da evolução da essencialidade do serviço público : a reclassificação da banda larga como serviço de telecomunicações nos Estados Unidos

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Direito, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, 2016.

Revisiting the Tasty raid: lesbian and gay respectability and police legitimacy

This article extends beyond analysis of homophobic police practices at the Tasty raid that took place in Melbourne in 1994 to explore the ways in which queer politics interact with constructions of ‘respectability’ in the contexts of criminalisation, policing and state protection. I argue that the successful construction of legitimate victimhood by lesbian and gay Tasty patrons (achieved largely through signifiers of middle-class respectability and the paradigm of sameness) impeded police efforts to control media narratives and secure legitimacy in the aftermath of the Tasty raid. The formal apology issued by Victoria Police in 2014 indicates that the Tasty raid was considered a significant enough stain on police reputation to warrant addressing two decades after the event itself. I consider the apology as an attempt to cleanse and redeem the institution of the negative image of police resulting from the Tasty raid. This case offers unique insights into some of the ways in which lesbians and gay men may achieve legitimacy as victims in a heteronormative context and how this might come at the cost of a structural analysis of sexuality, power and violence. It also highlights how state institutions navigate and avoid accountability to a specific and historically targeted group.

Addressing the curious black spot that is the separation between the principle of legality and sentencing

The principle of legality has evolved into a clear and entrenchedjurisprudential mechanism for protecting common law rights and freedoms. It operates as a shield to preserve the scope of application of fundamental rights and fre edoms. In recent years it has been increasingly applied by the courts to limit the scope of legislative provisions which potentially impinge on human rights and fundamental freedoms. Yet there is one domain where the principle of legality is conspicuously absent: sentencing. Ostensibly, this is paradoxical. Sentencing is the realm where the legalsystem operates in its most coercive manner against individuals. In thisarticle, we argue that logically the principle of legality has an importantrole in the sentencing system given the incursions by criminal sanctionsinto a number of basic rights, including the right to liberty, the freedom ofassociation and the deprivation of property. By way of illustration, we setout how the principle of legality should apply to the interpretation of keystatutory provisions. To this end, we argue that the objectives of generaldeterrence and specifi c deterrence should have less impact in sentencing. It is also suggested that judges should be more reluctant to send offenders with dependants to terms of imprisonment. Injecting the principle of legality into sentencing law and practice would result in the reduction in severity of a large number of sanctions, thereby reducing the frequency and extent to which the fundamental rights of offenders are violated. The methodology set out in this article can be applied to alter the operation of a number of legislative sentencing objectives and rules.

What do you do with a High Court decision you don’t like? Legislative, judicial and academic responses to Gambotto v WCP Ltd

The decision of the High Court of Australia in Gambotto v WCP Ltd wasboth controversial and widely debated. Some saw the decision as radically altering the balance of power in corporate law by granting minority shareholders extensive new powers to prevent the compulsory acquisition of their shares and thereby impeding commercial transactions that would benefit companies. There was also concern that the principles developed by the High Court for compulsory acquisition of shares undertaken by way of amendment of the corporate constitution would apply to other forms of compulsory acquisition, and corporate law more generally, again impeding many types of corporate transactions.We analyse the responses to the High Court decision. The decision had the potential to have a significant influence on Australian corporate law and the way corporate transactions involving compulsory share acquisitions are conducted. In particular, Gambotto was considered in more than 50 subsequent judgments giving many judges the opportunity to extend the Gambotto principles into new areas.We show that the responses to Gambotto were largely negative. Initial commentary in themedia and subsequent academic commentary was mostly critical. Almost uniformly, courts decided that the principles should not be extended.Parliament responded by enacting new provisions in the corporationslegislation facilitating the compulsory acquisition of shares and limiting the application of Gambotto. We document how courts and Parliamentresponded to a decision they did not like — a decision that had the potential to have major implications for corporate law and commercial transactions.We also analyse Gambotto by placing it in the broader political context ofthe role of the High Court at the time of the decision. Gambotto was decided when the High Court was in a period of unprecedented judicial activism.Subsequently, the High Court retreated from this judicial activism and weobserve similarities in how other courts restricted the application ofGambotto.

Putting the spoils of litigation into the shareholders’ pockets: when can shareholders bring a personal action against the directors of their company?

company is legally incorporated it must be treated like any other independent person with its rightsand liabilities appropriate to itself”.2 A consequence of this is the “proper plaintiff” principleestablished in Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461; 67 ER 189: the proper plaintiff in an action inrespect of a wrong done to a corporation is the corporation itself.3 It is also a “hallowed rule” thatdirectors owe their duties to the company, not the shareholders,4 and so any loss accruing to thecompany as a result of the directors’ breach of their duties is recoverable only by the company.5An obvious problem with this state of affairs is that a company will be unlikely to initiateproceedings against its directors when the company is controlled by those directors.6 While there aregood economic reasons for this division of management and ownership,7 shareholders are left with acritical question: under what circumstances can they initiate proceedings to recover loss suffered as aresult of company directors’ breach of their duties? Although one writer has referred to the“expansive statutory and common law arsenals” available to aggrieved shareholders,8 it seems ratherthe case that there are few effective remedies. For shareholders have no contractual relationship withdirectors,9 and the personal rights conferred on shareholders by statute or general law are largelyprocedural10 and seem a rather ineffective basis for “scrutinising directorial performance”.

La protection des données personnelles en droit international privé

Les nouvelles technologies et l’arrivée de l’Internet ont considérablement facilité les échanges transnationaux de données entre les entreprises publiques et/ou privées et également entre les personnes elles-mêmes. Cependant cette révolution numérique n’a pas été sans conséquences sur l’utilisation de nos données personnelles puisque cette abondance de données à la portée de tiers peut conduire à des atteintes : la commercialisation des données personnelles sans le consentement de l’intéressé par des entreprises ou encore la diffusion de sa photographie, de son nom, de son prénom à son insu en sont des exemples. La question qui vient alors se poser est en cas de litige, c’est-à-dire en cas d’atteintes au droit à la protection de nos données personnelles, présentant un ou des éléments d’extranéité, quels tribunaux pouvons-nous saisir ? Et quelle est la loi qui sera applicable ? Les droits québécois, de l’Union européenne, et suisse présentent différents critères de rattachement intéressants et adaptés à des situations prenant place hors et sur internet. Le droit commun de chacun de ces systèmes est envisagé, puis appliqué aux données personnelles dans le cadre d’une situation normale, et ensuite à internet si la situation diffère. La doctrine est également analysée dans la mesure où certaines solutions sont tout à fait intéressantes, et cela notamment sur internet. Un premier chapitre est consacré à la compétence internationale des tribunaux et aux critères de rattachement envisageables en droit commun à savoir notamment : le tribunal de l’État de survenance du préjudice, le tribunal de l’État de la faute ou encore le tribunal du domicile de la victime. Et ceux prévus ou non par la doctrine tels que l’accessibilité et le ciblage par exemple. Les conflits de lois sont étudiés dans un deuxième chapitre avec également l’énumération les différents facteurs de rattachement envisageables en droit commun comme la loi de l’État du préjudice, la loi de l’État de la faute ou encore la loi de l’État favorisant la victime. Et également ceux prévus par la doctrine : la loi de l’État « offrant la meilleure protection des données à caractère personnel » ou encore la loi de l’État où est établi le « maître du fichier ». Le tribunal le plus compétent au regard des principes généraux de droit international privé en cas d’atteintes au droit de la protection des données personnelles hors et sur internet est le tribunal de l’État du domicile de la victime. Et la meilleure loi applicable est la loi de l’État du domicile ou de la résidence principale du demandeur et du défendeur à l’instance, et dans le cas où la situation ne présente pas d’éléments d’extranéité, la meilleure loi est la loi favorisant la victime.

Juan de Mariana. Heredero de la escuela de Salamanca y precursor del liberalismo

Juan de Mariana (1536-1624) fue un autor español de la orden de los jesuitas que destacó por escribir el primer libro moderno de historia de España. Por encargo del rey Felipe II, publicó en latín Historia de rebus Hispaniae en 1592 y su propia traducción al español con el título Historia general de España en 1601. Esta investigación doctoral tiene como objetivo analizar sus principales obras de economía política De Rege et Regis Institutione (1599) y De Monetae Mutatione (1609), junto con su obra histórica, para contestar dos cuestiones importantes: si Juan de Mariana perteneció a la Escuela de Salamanca y, también, si podría considerarse un precursor del liberalismo que influyó en autores de los siglos XVII y XVIII. Con el objetivo de responder a la primera cuestión, la investigación propone dos agrupaciones posibles de los escolásticos tardíos españoles que permiten analizar en su conjunto las instituciones y los principios que defendieron. La primera clasificación agrupa a los autores en función de su vinculación a la Universidad de Salamanca y del uso del derecho de gentes (que es el derecho consuetudinario o “common law” inglés) y se denomina Escuela de Salamanca. Sin embargo, la segunda clasificación agrupa a los autores como un colectivo más amplio que fusiona la Escuela de Salamanca junto con los autores españoles sobre los que influyó y que, rápidamente, se extendió a todas las universidades españolas (Palencia, Valladolid, Alcalá de Henares, Valencia, Sevilla), vinculados por el uso genérico del derecho natural (como referirse a lo que “existe con independencia de la voluntad humana”); que emplearon en la identificaron de las instituciones y de los principios responsables del funcionamiento del orden de mercado o económico como, entre otros, los derechos de propiedad, los contratos privados, el comercio internacional, el principio de consentimiento, los principios tributarios, el precio del mercado, el origen del dinero y sus funciones, la necesidad de equilibrio en los presupuestos públicos, los impuestos bajos y el mínimo endeudamiento, el principio de la preferencia temporal, la tasa de interés de los préstamos, la importancia de las letras de crédito… Se han comparado las instituciones que defendió el padre Mariana con aquellas que argumentaron los autores de la Escuela de Salamanca, llegando a la conclusión de que no pertenece a la Escuela de Salamanca de Economía (ESE) porque no emplea el derecho de gentes y nunca estudió en la Universidad de Salamanca pero que, sin embargo, sí puede considerarse un heredero de la misma y que, de hecho, constituye uno de los máximos exponentes de un conjunto más amplio, denominado Escuela Española de Economía (EEE)...

Expanding our Constitutional Horizons: A Comprehensive Study of Quasi-Constitutionality in Canada

A number of laws in Canada which uphold rights are referred to as quasi-constitutional by the courts in recognition of their special importance. Quasi-constitutional statutes are enacted through the regular legislative process, although they are being interpreted and applied in a fashion which has become remarkably similar to constitutional law, and are therefore having an important affect over other legislation. Quasi-constitutionality has surprisingly received limited scholarly attention, and very few serious attempts at explaining its significance have been made. This dissertation undertakes a comprehensive study of quasi-constitutionality which considers its theoretical basis, its interpretation and legal significance, as well as its similarities to comparable forms of law in other Commonwealth jurisdictions. Part I examines the theoretical basis of quasi-constitutionality and its relationship to the Constitution. As a statutory and common law form of fundamental law, quasi-constitutionality is shown to signify an association with the Canadian Constitution and the foundational principles that underpin it. Part II proceeds to consider the special rules of interpretation applied to quasi-constitutional legislation, the basis of this interpretative approach, and the connection between the interpretation of similar provisions in quasi-constitutional legislation and the Constitution. As a statutory form of fundamental law, quasi-constitutional legislation is given a broad, liberal and purposive interpretation which significantly expands the rights which they protect. The theoretical basis of this approach is found in both the fundamental nature of the rights upheld by quasi-constitutional legislation as well as legislative intent. Part III explores how quasi-constitutional statutes affect the interpretation of regular legislation and how they are used for the purposes of judicial review. Quasi-constitutional legislation has a significant influence over regular statutes in the interpretative exercise, which in some instances results in conflicting statutes being declared inoperable. The basis of this form of judicial review is demonstrated to be rooted in statutory interpretation, and as such it provides an interesting model of rights protection and judicial review that is not conflated to constitutional and judicial supremacy.

Per incuriam: the decision on the overtime claim in Leung Ka Lau v Hospital Authority

In Leung Ka Lau v Hospital Authority the plaintiffs were doctors who claimed compensation for, inter alia, enforced overtime extracted without pay from them by their employer, the defendants. The Court of First Instance, the Court of Appeal and the Court of Final Appeal dismissed their overtime claims on purely the terms of their contracts of employment. This paper argues that the decisions of all three courts on the overtime claims were made per incuriam because their attention was not drawn to the applicable statutory provisions which would have invalidated the contractual provisions on which the courts rested their decisions. The paper sketches the socio-economic and ethical basis of overtime work and pay before proceeding to analyse the common law (contractual) basis of the judgments, traces the history as well as undertakes construction of the statutory provisions which, if taken into account, would have seen the plaintiffs succeeding.

The principle of legality and contemporanea exposition est optima et fortissima in lege

If the principle of legality operates to obscure from Parliament the common law (rights) backdrop against which it legislates, the clarity or rights-sensitivity of that legislation cannot be improved. This undercuts, rather than promotes, the democratic and rule of law values that underpin the modern conception of the principle and its contemporary normative justification. So the courts must strive to give Parliament the clearest possible picture as to the content of the fundamental common law rights it seeks to protect and, depending on the right, freedom, or principle in legislative play, the strength with which the principle will be applied in order to do so. Parliament (and parliamentary counsel) can only ‘squarely confront’ those fundamental rights the existence and content of which was known at the time of legislating. The proposition which, necessarily, follows is that the rule of contemporanea exposition est optima et fortissimo in lege must be revived when judges apply the principle of legality to the construction of statutes. If the courts are to maintain and take seriously the normative justification for the principle then its application to the construction of statutes can only operate to protect from legislative encroachment those fundamental rights existing at the time the statute was enacted.

La protection des données personnelles en droit international privé

Les nouvelles technologies et l’arrivée de l’Internet ont considérablement facilité les échanges transnationaux de données entre les entreprises publiques et/ou privées et également entre les personnes elles-mêmes. Cependant cette révolution numérique n’a pas été sans conséquences sur l’utilisation de nos données personnelles puisque cette abondance de données à la portée de tiers peut conduire à des atteintes : la commercialisation des données personnelles sans le consentement de l’intéressé par des entreprises ou encore la diffusion de sa photographie, de son nom, de son prénom à son insu en sont des exemples. La question qui vient alors se poser est en cas de litige, c’est-à-dire en cas d’atteintes au droit à la protection de nos données personnelles, présentant un ou des éléments d’extranéité, quels tribunaux pouvons-nous saisir ? Et quelle est la loi qui sera applicable ? Les droits québécois, de l’Union européenne, et suisse présentent différents critères de rattachement intéressants et adaptés à des situations prenant place hors et sur internet. Le droit commun de chacun de ces systèmes est envisagé, puis appliqué aux données personnelles dans le cadre d’une situation normale, et ensuite à internet si la situation diffère. La doctrine est également analysée dans la mesure où certaines solutions sont tout à fait intéressantes, et cela notamment sur internet. Un premier chapitre est consacré à la compétence internationale des tribunaux et aux critères de rattachement envisageables en droit commun à savoir notamment : le tribunal de l’État de survenance du préjudice, le tribunal de l’État de la faute ou encore le tribunal du domicile de la victime. Et ceux prévus ou non par la doctrine tels que l’accessibilité et le ciblage par exemple. Les conflits de lois sont étudiés dans un deuxième chapitre avec également l’énumération les différents facteurs de rattachement envisageables en droit commun comme la loi de l’État du préjudice, la loi de l’État de la faute ou encore la loi de l’État favorisant la victime. Et également ceux prévus par la doctrine : la loi de l’État « offrant la meilleure protection des données à caractère personnel » ou encore la loi de l’État où est établi le « maître du fichier ». Le tribunal le plus compétent au regard des principes généraux de droit international privé en cas d’atteintes au droit de la protection des données personnelles hors et sur internet est le tribunal de l’État du domicile de la victime. Et la meilleure loi applicable est la loi de l’État du domicile ou de la résidence principale du demandeur et du défendeur à l’instance, et dans le cas où la situation ne présente pas d’éléments d’extranéité, la meilleure loi est la loi favorisant la victime.

Family law issues and schools : guidance for Australian educators

A substantial number of Australian children are now living in separated families, with many moving between their parents’ homes. This has led to educators being confronted with an increasing number of family law issues. This article discusses the key aspects of family law that involve children. It highlights the need for schools to be aware of all family law orders that relate to children in their care, including family court, domestic violence and child protection orders. It also provides guidance in relation to how schools can adopt child focused approaches in some common scenarios, where parents are in dispute. In particular, we will recommend that educators take a child-focused approach, consistent with the principal provision of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) that ‘the best interests of the child’ be the paramount consideration. We will highlight how this contrasts starkly with what can be described as a ‘parental rights’ interpretation, which has unfortunately been taken by some since the 2006 amendments to the Family Law Act, and is, in our view, directly at odds with the intention of the legislation.

Foucault Goes to Law School : Using Foucault to Examine Australian Legal Education

This paper will consider the way that Foucault’s work has been utilised to examine Australian legal education, particularly in the context of understanding the construction of the legal identity. While remaining sensitive to the many potential ‘uses’ of Foucault’s tools, as well as his problematisation of the author as an organising feature of discourse, this paper will argue that legal education scholarship overwhelmingly utilises concepts such as ‘discourse’ and ‘power-knowledge’, which, while useful, cannot provide a nuanced understanding of the construction of the legal identity. Consequently, this paper suggests that future legal education research utilise Foucault’s concepts of ‘ethics’ and ‘governmentality’ to address these issues.

Charities, civil society and the charity law reviews on the island of Ireland

This article considers the opportunity, presented by the coincidence of simultaneous charity law reviews in the two jurisdictions on the island of Ireland, for an adjustment of charity law frameworks to maximise appropriate and effective charitable activity within each jurisdiction,while also facilitating the coordination of some such activity between both. It examines the nature of civil society and charity law, and the relationship between them. The article argues that a creative legislative response to this opportunity could address themes of social inclusion common to both jurisdictions and thereby contribute to the consolidation of civil society on this island.