A comparison of model laws as a starting point for the development of an enforceable international consumer protection regime

This article is concerned primarily with an examination and comparison of select aspects of the model international consumer protection laws proposed by the United Nations (UN), the European Union (EU), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), using the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Australia) as a basis for examination and comparison. As a secondary consideration, it also broadly examines the content of, and differences between, the model laws. The motive for this article is that any future enforceable international consumer protection regime (possibly in the form of an international treaty or convention) would need to take into account the UN, EU and OECD guidelines. A cross-comparison of those model laws, and a comparison of them with the consumer protection provisions of a well established national consumer protection law, should provide a useful starting point for the development of such a regime. The 'select aspects' of the model laws in question are the various provisions of those laws which could relate to situations involving the wrong delivery or non-delivery of goods.

Criminal Liability of Organizations, Corporations, Legal Persons, and Similar Entities on Law of Portuguese Cybercrime: A Brief Discussion on the Issue of Crimes of “False Information,” the “Damage on Other Programs or Computer Data,” the “Computer-Software Sabotage,” the “Illegitimate Access,” the “Unlawful Interception,” and “Illegitimate Reproduction of the Protected Program”

Abstract: in Portugal, and in much of the legal systems of Europe, «legal persons» are likely to be criminally responsibilities also for cybercrimes. Like for example the following crimes: «false information»; «damage on other programs or computer data»; «computer-software sabotage»; «illegitimate access»; «unlawful interception» and «illegitimate reproduction of protected program». However, in Portugal, have many exceptions. Exceptions to the «question of criminal liability» of «legal persons». Some «legal persons» can not be blamed for cybercrime. The legislature did not leave! These «legal persons» are v.g. the following («public entities»): legal persons under public law, which include the public business entities; entities utilities, regardless of ownership; or other legal persons exercising public powers. In other words, and again as an example, a Portuguese public university or a private concessionaire of a public service in Portugal, can not commit (in Portugal) any one of cybercrime pointed. Fair? Unfair. All laws should provide that all legal persons can commit cybercrimes. PS: resumo do artigo em inglês.

«A Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção», «Direito Penal § Fundamentos Dogmáticos e Político-Criminais»

Resumo: 1- Introdução: algumas notícias da comunicação social; 2 – O designado «Conselho de Prevenção de Corrupção»; 3 – Procuradoria-Geral da República (P.G.R.) e o Departamento Central de Investigação e Acção Penal (D.I.A.P.); 4 – Alguns sítios com relevo; 5 – Alguns dos problemas que podem ser colocados em relação à Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção; 5.1 – Âmbito dos problemas a serem falados; 6 – Qual a noção de «empresas que vamos utilizar»?; 6.1 – A noção de «empresa» em sentido geral objectivo e penal; 7 – Mas que tipo de crimes de corrupção vamos falar?; 8 – O art. 11º do Código Penal e os crimes de corrupção no contexto do ordenamento jurídico português; 8.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «em nome da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «no interesse da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «quando não há interesse colectivo»?; 9 – E haverá diferenças, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.)?; 10 – E como é que a Jurisprudência portuguesa, a que tivemos acesso - dado não haver ainda fartura de decisões neste campo -, estabelece o nexo de imputação de responsabilidade penal a uma pessoa colectiva e/ou organização?; 10.1 – Uma primeira pré-conclusão dentro do objectivo que pretendemos demonstrar na totalidade deste trabalho; 11 – Uma segunda pré-conclusão: será que as diferenças acima assinaladas, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.), são as únicas? Veja-se o caso, v.g., do art. 7º do Regime Geral das Infracções Tributárias (R.G.I.T.); 12 – Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma primeira grande conclusão; 13 – Uma (primeira) hipótese de solução; 14 – Que tipo de «empresa» podemos enquadrar no art. 11º do Código Penal?; 14.1 – De acordo com o referido anteriormente, podemos dizer que todas as «empresas» podem praticar os crimes previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.2 – De acordo com o referido antes, quais são as «empresas» que não podem praticar os crimes de corrupção que estão previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.3 – Uma outra pré-conclusão: 14.4 – Um esboço de um dos possíveis problemas; 14.4.1 – Mas, afinal, o que são Entidades Públicas Empresariais (E.P.E.)?; 14.5 – Outra hipótese de esboço de um outro dos possíveis problemas que aqui podemos encontrar; 14.6 – Nova pré-conclusão; 14.7 – Uma outra importante pergunta a fazer e a responder desde já; 14.7.1 - Alarguemos, pois, um pouco a nossa investigação para além do Código Penal português; 14.7.2 – O problema da responsabilidade penal das organizações e/ou «pessoas colectivas», rectius, neste breve ensaio, empresas, pela prática de crimes de corrupção previstos e punidos na mencionada Lei n.º 20/2008, de 21 de Abril («Responsabilidade penal por crimes de corrupção no comércio internacional e na actividade privada»); 14.7.3 – Mais algumas pré-conclusões; 15 - Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma segunda grande conclusão; 16 - O que também apresenta outras implicações como por exemplo na aplicação do crime de «branqueamento» quando nos fala em «corrupção» como «crime primário»; 17 – Outras interrogações; 18 – Conclusão final, mas não última, como nenhuma o pode ser em ciência; 19 – Hipótese de solução. § Abstract: 1 - Introduction: some news media; 2 - The so-called "Council for the Prevention of Corruption”, 3 – “Attorney General's Office” (PGR) and the Central Bureau of Investigation and Penal Action (DIAP) 4 - Some sites with relief , 5 - Some of the problems that can be placed in relation to the Corporate Responsibility of the Crime of Corruption; 5.1 - Scope of issues to be spoken, 6 - What is the concept of "companies that we will use"?; 6.1 - The term “business” in a general purpose and criminal matters; 7 - What kind of crimes of corruption we talking about?; 8 - Art. 11 of the Penal Code and the crimes of corruption in the context of the Portuguese legal system; 8.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "in the name of the legal person"?; 8.2 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means “in the interests of the legal person"?; 8.2.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "where there is no collective interest"?; 9 - There will be differences, for example, between the operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Legal Infractions Anti-Economic and Against Public Health (RIAECSP)?; 10 - And how does the case law of Portugal, we had access - as there still plenty of decisions in this field - makes a connection of allocating criminal liability to a legal person and / or organization?; 10.1 - A first pre-completion within the objective that we intend to demonstrate in all of this work; 11 - A second pre-conclusion: that the differences will be noted above, for example, between operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Rules of the Offences Against Anti-Economics and Public Health (RIAECSP) are the only ones? Take the case v.g. of art. 7 of the Legal Framework of Tax Offences (RGIT) 12 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, do it here, in this brief essay, a first major conclusion; 13 - A (first) chance for a solution, 14 - What kind “undertaking” we can frame the art. 11 of the Penal Code?; 14.1 - According to the above, we can say that all "companies" can practice the crimes defined and punished in the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.2 - According to the mentioned before, what are the "business" who cannot practice corruption crimes that are planned and punished the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.3 - Another pre-completion: 14.4 - A sketch of one of the possible problems; 14.4.1 - But after all the entities that are Public Enterprise (EPE)?; 14.5 - Another chance to draft another one of the possible problems that can be found here; 14.6 - New pre-completion; 14.7 - Another important question to ask and answer now; 14.7.1 - Let us expand, then, a little beyond our investigation of the Portuguese Penal Code; 14.7.2 - The problem of criminal liability of organizations and / or "legal persons", rectius, this brief essay, companies, for crimes of corruption provided for and punished mentioned in Law No. 20/2008 of 21 April ("Criminal liability for crimes of corruption in international trade and private activities"); 14.7.3 - Some more pre-conclusions; 15 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, let it be here in this brief essay, a second major conclusion, 16 - Who also has other implications such as the application of the crime of "money laundering" when we talk about “corruption” as “primary crime”, 17 - Other questions; 18 - Bottom line, but not last, as the can be no science; 19 - Hypothesis solution. Abstract como no livro.

A Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção: o Caso Português a partir de uma Perspectiva de Direito Penal, mas também de Criminologia

1- Introdução: algumas notícias da comunicação social; 2 – O designado «Conselho de Prevenção de Corrupção»; 3 – Procuradoria-Geral da República (P.G.R.) e o Departamento Central de Investigação e Acção Penal (D.I.A.P.); 4 – Alguns sítios com relevo; 5 – Alguns dos problemas que podem ser colocados em relação à Responsabilidade das Empresas pelo Crime de Corrupção; 5.1 – Âmbito dos problemas a serem falados; 6 – Qual a noção de «empresas que vamos utilizar»?; 6.1 – A noção de «empresa» em sentido geral objectivo e penal; 7 – Mas que tipo de crimes de corrupção vamos falar?; 8 – O art. 11º do Código Penal e os crimes de corrupção no contexto do ordenamento jurídico português; 8.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «em nome da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «no interesse da pessoa colectiva»?; 8.2.1 – No contexto do art. 11º do Código Penal, o que significa «quando não há interesse colectivo»?; 9 – E haverá diferenças, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.)?; 10 – E como é que a Jurisprudência portuguesa, a que tivemos acesso - dado não haver ainda fartura de decisões neste campo -, estabelece o nexo de imputação de responsabilidade penal a uma pessoa colectiva e/ou organização?; 10.1 – Uma primeira pré-conclusão dentro do objectivo que pretendemos demonstrar na totalidade deste trabalho; 11 – Uma segunda pré-conclusão: será que as diferenças acima assinaladas, por exemplo, entre o modo de funcionamento técnico-jurídico do art. 11º do Código Penal e o art. 3º do Regime das Infracções Anti-Económicas e Contra a Saúde Pública (R.I.A.E.C.S.P.), são as únicas? Veja-se o caso, v.g., do art. 7º do Regime Geral das Infracções Tributárias (R.G.I.T.); 12 – Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma primeira grande conclusão; 13 – Uma (primeira) hipótese de solução; 14 – Que tipo de «empresa» podemos enquadrar no art. 11º do Código Penal?; 14.1 – De acordo com o referido anteriormente, podemos dizer que todas as «empresas» podem praticar os crimes previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.2 – De acordo com o referido antes, quais são as «empresas» que não podem praticar os crimes de corrupção que estão previstos e punidos no Código Penal português?; 14.3 – Uma outra pré-conclusão: 14.4 – Um esboço de um dos possíveis problemas; 14.4.1 – Mas, afinal, o que são Entidades Públicas Empresariais (E.P.E.)?; 14.5 – Outra hipótese de esboço de um outro dos possíveis problemas que aqui podemos encontrar; 14.6 – Nova pré-conclusão; 14.7 – Uma outra importante pergunta a fazer e a responder desde já; 14.7.1 - Alarguemos, pois, um pouco a nossa investigação para além do Código Penal português; 14.7.2 – O problema da responsabilidade penal das organizações e/ou «pessoas colectivas», rectius, neste breve ensaio, empresas, pela prática de crimes de corrupção previstos e punidos na mencionada Lei n.º 20/2008, de 21 de Abril («Responsabilidade penal por crimes de corrupção no comércio internacional e na actividade privada»); 14.7.3 – Mais algumas pré-conclusões; 15 - Em face das duas pré-conclusões anteriores, faça-se aqui, neste breve ensaio, uma segunda grande conclusão; 16 - O que também apresenta outras implicações como por exemplo na aplicação do crime de «branqueamento» quando nos fala em «corrupção» como «crime primário»; 17 – Outras interrogações; 18 – Conclusão final, mas não última, como nenhuma o pode ser em ciência; 19 – Hipótese de solução; 20 – Novos desenvolvimentos. § 1 - Introduction: some news media; 2 - The so-called "Council for the Prevention of Corruption”, 3 – “Attorney General's Office” (PGR) and the Central Bureau of Investigation and Penal Action (DIAP) 4 - Some sites with relief , 5 - Some of the problems that can be placed in relation to the Corporate Responsibility of the Crime of Corruption; 5.1 - Scope of issues to be spoken, 6 - What is the concept of "companies that we will use"?; 6.1 - The term “business” in a general purpose and criminal matters; 7 - What kind of crimes of corruption we talking about?; 8 - Art. 11 of the Penal Code and the crimes of corruption in the context of the Portuguese legal system; 8.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "in the name of the legal person"?; 8.2 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means “in the interests of the legal person"?; 8.2.1 - In the context of art. 11 of the Penal Code, which means "where there is no collective interest"?; 9 - There will be differences, for example, between the operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Legal Infractions Anti-Economic and Against Public Health (RIAECSP)?; 10 - And how does the case law of Portugal, we had access - as there still plenty of decisions in this field - makes a connection of allocating criminal liability to a legal person and / or organization?; 10.1 - A first pre-completion within the objective that we intend to demonstrate in all of this work; 11 - A second pre-conclusion: that the differences will be noted above, for example, between operating mode of the Art. 11 of the Criminal Code and Art. 3 of the Rules of the Offences Against Anti-Economics and Public Health (RIAECSP) are the only ones? Take the case v.g. of art. 7 of the Legal Framework of Tax Offences (RGIT) 12 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, do it here, in this brief essay, a first major conclusion; 13 - A (first) chance for a solution, 14 - What kind “undertaking” we can frame the art. 11 of the Penal Code?; 14.1 - According to the above, we can say that all "companies" can practice the crimes defined and punished in the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.2 - According to the mentioned before, what are the "business" who cannot practice corruption crimes that are planned and punished the Portuguese Penal Code?; 14.3 - Another pre-completion: 14.4 - A sketch of one of the possible problems; 14.4.1 - But after all the entities that are Public Enterprise (EPE)?; 14.5 - Another chance to draft another one of the possible problems that can be found here; 14.6 - New pre-completion; 14.7 - Another important question to ask and answer now; 14.7.1 - Let us expand, then, a little beyond our investigation of the Portuguese Penal Code; 14.7.2 - The problem of criminal liability of organizations and / or "legal persons", rectius, this brief essay, companies, for crimes of corruption provided for and punished mentioned in Law No. 20/2008 of 21 April ("Criminal liability for crimes of corruption in international trade and private activities"); 14.7.3 - Some more pre-conclusions; 15 - In view of the two pre-earlier conclusions, let it be here in this brief essay, a second major conclusion, 16 - Who also has other implications such as the application of the crime of "money laundering" when we talk about “corruption” as “primary crime”, 17 - Other questions; 18 - Bottom line, but not last, as the can be no science; 19 - Hypothesis solution; 20 - New developments.

Evaluating the Guimarães 2012 European Capital of Culture: National and International Tourists’ Behaviors and Perceptions

In 2012, Guimarães hosted the European Capital of Culture (ECOC). An evaluation of this event was needed because public, private, and community funds were involved. This analysis considers tourists as external and independent stakeholders who assessed the cultural activities developed during the event as well as the attributes of the city. The main objectives of the research conducted were to assess the visitors` motivations during the hosting of the Guimarães ECOC 2012, their perceptions towards the city and if national and international visitors kept different perceptions of it. For two months, in the summer of 2012, a survey was applied to 390 visitors. The results revealed that hosting the 2012 ECOC was a major contribution towards attracting new visitors to the city (though many of the visitors stayed only for a short period of time). Based on tourists’ perceptions, the tangible heritage was clearly detached from the set of attributes associated to Guimarães, whereas the intangible heritage was less noted. The Portuguese tourists seem to be more prone to value the tangible heritage than the foreign tourists. Overall, Guimarães received a very positive evaluation relating to the city’s image and, as stated by tourists, visiting it was declared to be highly recommended. Following the obtained empirical results, the need for changing the city’s promoted image emerges, which has been too centered on its tangible heritage. In doing so, it is believed that there will be longer overnight stays by visitors.

Are public officials really less satisfied than private sector workers?A comparative study in Brazil

This research aims to compare the public and private sectors with regard to satisfaction at work. We conducted a survey with 670 professionals from both sectors in Brazil. The results of variance analysis confirm previous researches indicating that public officials are less satisfied with their work than private sector workers. However, this result does not repeat when we evaluate the satisfaction dimensions. For instance, public officials reported being more satisfied than private sector workers with regard to social environment and work stability. Unexpectedly, the results suggest that there is no difference between these sectors when we analyze the satisfaction with supervision. Therefore, this article is relevant for Brazilian managers, by offering an empirical research on the distinction between public and private. The article also discusses the theoretical implications, since Brazilian findings do not completely support the international literature.

Enterprises' internationalisation strategy: skills in exportation and customs law

Economical development has always been connected to the commercial exchanges between people, due to the necessity to suppress their needs. With the increasing growth of international business and more competitive and demanding markets, exportation has become an important first step to internationalisation. Unlike what happened in the past, companies must be aware that the enrolment in the current global market is risky and requires elaborated technical procedures. Internationalisation should not be treated as an isolated event of business management. The first part of this paper aims to understand the export process and fit it in the current stage of international trade, keeping in mind the framework of export under the customs law. Then, we tried to understand how Portuguese companies should face this process in their internationalisation strategy, and what skills organisations must acquire to be able to export competitively in the current scenario of globalisation. The investigation was based on interviews in companies that, through a process of internationalisation by exportation, have implemented themselves strongly in extern markets. This investigation allowed us to analyse the companies’ motivations to become international, as well as the selection criteria for the export destinations. It was also possible to identify the main obstacles to the internationalisation of Portuguese companies. We concluded that companies that choose exportation as a way to become international acquire specific skills that enable them to become competitive in international trade. However, studies have failed to answer the second initial question about whether the measures implemented by Customs potentiate exports.