Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The construction of copyright law can be causally explained by two possible types of explanation: dialectical explanations and material explanations. I argue that an adequate causal description of the copyright discourses of Western legal systems must incorporate a material explanation in order to account for many of the general and particular characteristics of the evolution of copyright. As a vast variety of contingent and interactive social and technical conditions have caused the evolution of copyright, we should expect a plausible material explanation to be multifaceted and multi-layered. However, in addition to providing a causal sociohistorical description, a good legal explanation should also seek to include a normative account detailing the moral grounds of the law, or lack thereof. Dialectical explanations can be teleological: they can presuppose that the law is directed towards a perfect legal state and that it is essentially guided by a set of moral ideals. Material explanations, on the other hand, are essentially non-normative and do not explicitly address moral questions. But this does not entail the elimination of moral considerations from material explanations. As I aim to show, we should not address the moral and sociohistorical elements of copyright legal discourses independently because they are causally connected: moral justifications have been rhetorically used by social actors to influence lawmaking processes, and conversely, changes in technical conditions have given rise to sociotechnical formations that enable and structure the norms of copyright. Given this, I propose that lawmakers should adjudicate and legislate from a broad and flexible standpoint. They should not attempt to merely apply old principles to new problems, but should comprehend new moral norms introduced by new conditions, and balance them against the older, more established principles enshrined in traditional intellectual property theories.

Tesis dirigida por María Isabel Huertas Martín. Esta investigación, se centra en el estudio de la institucionalidad como tal y a ciertas semejanzas y/o diferencias que existen entre las legislaciones de Iberoamérica en ese tema.

À la lecture de l'article 2365 c.c.Q., le créancier et la caution ne peuvent pas percevoir les droits et les libertés que ce texte concrétise à leur encontre ou à leur profit. Pour pallier ce problème, les auteurs et la jurisprudence ont alors laissé place à leur imagination afin de tenter de classifier cette disposition à l'intérieur d'institutions juridiques éprouvées, le tout en vue de démythifier le contenu de la règle de droit. Pour notre part, nous considérons que l'exception de non-subrogation est une notion originale en soi, qui trouve sa source à l'intérieur même de son institution. La thèse que nous soutenons est que l'exception de non-subrogation, mode de libération qui a pour mission de combattre le comportement opportuniste, cristallise l'obligation de bonne foi en imposant implicitement au créancier une obligation de bonne subrogation. Tout manquement du créancier à cette obligation a comme conséquence de rendre le droit de créance du créancier irrecevable à l'égard de la caution devant les tribunaux. Ce précepte éclaircit le contexte de l'article 2365 C.c.Q. et, par le fait même, il permet de délimiter le contour de son domaine et de préciser ses conditions d'application. L'exception de non-subrogation est un mécanisme juridique qui date de l'époque romaine. Elle est maintenant intégrée dans presque tous les systèmes juridiques du monde, tant en droit civil qu'en common law. Dans la législation québécoise, elle s'est cristallisée à l'article 2365 C.c.Q. Il s'agit d'une disposition d'ordre public qui ne peut être invoquée que par la caution. Son application dépend du cumul de quatre conditions: 1) le fait du créancier; 2) la perte d'un droit subrogatoire; 3) le préjudice de la caution; 4) le lien causal entre les trois derniers éléments. Lorsque ces quatre conditions sont remplies, la caution est libérée de son engagement dans la mesure du préjudice qu'elle subit. Article 2365 of the Civil Code of Quebec ("C.C.Q.") states that the creditor and the surety cannot claim rights and liberties that the text secures for or against them. To deal with this problem, the authors and authorities gave free reign to imagination in an attempt to categorize this provision within recognized legal institutions and thereby demythicize the content of the rule of law. We are of the opinion that the non-subrogation exception is in itself an original concept that arises from within its institution. We believe that the non-subrogation exception, a discharge mode which aims at fighting opportunistic behaviour, crystallises the duty of good faith by implicitly imposing upon the creditor the obligation of subrogation. The creditor's failure to comply with this obligation will result in his right to claim in respect of the surety not being receivable in court. This throws some light on the context of Article 2365 C.c.Q., defines its boundaries and clarifies its applicability. The non-subrogation exception is a legal mechanism that goes back to Roman times. ft has now been incorporated into both civil and common law in almost ail legal systems in the world. In Quebec legislation, it falls under Article 2365 C.C.Q. It is a public order provision that only the surety can cite. The enforcement of this provision is subject to the following conditions: 1) the act of the creditor; 2) the loss of a subrogatory right; 3) the surety's prejudice; 4) the causal link between the three. When these conditions are fulfilled, the surety is released from his obligation to the extent of the prejudice he has suffered.

Esta pesquisa tem por objetivo abordar a questão do processo de integração econômica dos Estados da África, como estratégia para o desenvolvimento do continente africano. A integração de Estados em blocos econômicos teve seu marco com a criação das Comunidades Européias nos anos 50 do século XX. Países europeus decidiram depois da Segunda Guerra Mundial agrupar-se (em processos políticos e econômicos) para evitar possíveis novas guerras e fortalecer suas economias destruídas por tais conflitos. A integração européia passou a servir de exemplo e modelo para as experiências de cooperação nos outros continentes. Na África, os Estados começaram a se aproximar depois da sua independência política no final dos anos 50 e início da década de 60, como forma de conjugar esforços para a libertação dos territórios que ainda se encontravam sob o jugo colonial, buscando também a libertação econômica dos territórios independentes. Nesse sentido, o presente estudo confere ênfase ao tema dos blocos econômicos da África Ocidental, destacando a importância da fusão entre a Comunidade Econômica dos Estados da África Ocidental (CEDEAO) e a União Econômica e Monetária da África Ocidental (UEMOA), com a finalidade do estabelecimento da Comunidade Econômica Africana.