Bibliographie sélective OHADA

Le Mémorandum d’entente d’Abuja pour le contrôle des navires par l’Etat du port dans la région de l’Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre » a été signé le 22 octobre 1999 à la 3ème réunion sur la coopération en matière de contrôle des navires par l’Etat du port. Sur 19 Administrations maritimes ayant participé aux deux réunions préparatoires, 16 représentants des Administrations maritimes ont signé ce qu’il convient d’appeler désormais l’acte de naissance de la grande concertation de la sous-région en matière de contrôle des navires par l’Etat du port. La naissance du MOU d’Abuja consacre en Afrique les compétences de l’Etat du port en matière de contrôle des navires étrangers. C’est le développement du droit international qui a favorisé cette évolution qui tempère le principe séculaire de la loi du pavillon auquel le navire obéissait depuis lors et qui n’a pas toujours bien fonctionné. Le MOU d’Abuja institue donc clairement le « port state control » qui consiste à en une visite à bord du navire en vue de vérifier la validité des certificats et autres documents appropriés aux fins du Mémorandum, ainsi que l’état du navire, de son équipement et son équipage et les conditions de vie et de travail de l’équipage. Il vise également la protection de l’environnement par le respect des Conventions internationales. Ayant encore la nature juridique de « soft law », le MOU d’Abuja rencontre de nombreux obstacles pour sa mise en œuvre afin de réduire et d’éliminer les navires sous normes qui fréquentent les ports africains. Même s’il est un accord pertinent par sa référence aux Conventions internationales en matière de sécurité et aussi un instrument de communautarisation du droit de la sécurité maritime en Afrique, il reste néanmoins faiblement appliqué. Ne gagnerait-il pas à être communautarisé comme l’a été celui de Paris dans une politique commune africaine de la sécurité des transports maritimes pour son efficacité ?

International trade relations have become much more legalised under the World Trade Organization (WTO) than under the former international trade system created pursuant to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) of the WTO clearly represents a shift toward a rule-oriented, legalistic and adjudicative approach, which is intended to enhance that status of, and confidence in, the WTO dispute settlement system. The approach is likely to ensure greater stability and predictability in the system by encouraging precise decisions on the merits of disputes and discouraging infractions. Its greater binding effect serves as a powerful disincentive to those Members who have a propensity to favour unilateral measures to solve international trade disputes. This is particularly beneficial for developing countries that sought a system which recognises their disadvantaged position compared to the greater bargaining and retaliatory power of developed countries. However, despite the positive assessment of the WTO dispute settlement system, the functioning of the system is working against the interest of developing countries in having an efficient dispute settlement system that considers their needs and deals fairly with their disputes. This thesis examines the participation of developing countries in the dispute settlement system of the WTO, and argues that they are in a disadvantageous position compared to their developed counterparts. The system's failure to effectively address or efficiently deal with this position is an evidence of its bias against and deficiency towards developing countries' participation. The thesis focuses on the problematic issues developing countries face throughout their use of the system. It also considers the role that the DSU has played in addressing these issues and the efficiency of that role in restraining and limiting their effect on developing countries' participation in the system. The thesis analyses some ideas on the reform of the DSU that have been proposed through WTO negotiations or literature, and discusses their applicability on the current dispute settlement system. Finally, the thesis employs these proposals along with its discussion on the subject to introduce a reformed model of the DSU which is more sensitive to developing countries' concerns in the system in order to help providing an understanding of how such modifications could be carried out in future reforms on the DSU.

Türk Hukuku'nda navlun (deniz yolu ile eşya taşıma) sözleşmeleri; yolculuk çarteri sözleşmesi ve kırkambar sözleşmesi olmak üzere iki ana gruba ayrılmıştır. Bunlardan çarter sözleşmeleri arızi deniz taşımacılığında, kırkambar sözleşmesi ise genellikle düzenli hat taşımacılığında kullanılır. Günümüzde deniz taşımacılığında yaşanan gelişmelerin sonucu olarak düzenli hat taşımacılığının ve kırkambar sözleşmesinin önemi artmaktadır.Bu tezde; Türk Hukuku'nda kırkambar sözleşmesi kavramı, sözleşmenin asli unsurları, özellikleri, benzer sözleşmelerle karşılaştırılması, sözleşmeye uygulanacak hükümlerin tespiti gibi konuların yanında sözleşmenin tarafları, ilgili kişileri, sözleşmenin ifasında yer alan yardımcı kişileri, tarafların hak ve yükümlülükleri ve sözleşmenin sona ermesine değinilmiş Türk Ticaret Kanunu ve diğer mevzuat hükümlerinden, ilgili uluslararası andlaşmalardan, ticari örf-adet kurallarından, yüksek mahkeme kararlarından, öğretiden, uygulamada kullanılan tip sözleşme ve konişmento örneklerinden yararlanılmıştır. In Turkish Law, contracts of affreightment are divided into two main cathegories which are; voyage charter and contract of common carriage of goods. While the former is being used in tramp shipping, the latter is being used in liner shipping. As a result of recent developements in carriage of goods by sea, the importance of liner shipping and contract of common carriage of goods has been rising.This thesis is based on; Turkish Commercial Code, other related national regulations and international agreements, customs, decisions of high courts, doctrine, mostly used standard contract and bill of lading forms. In this thesis; the chracteristics, parties, differences from other contracts, rights and obligations of the parties and termination of contract of common carriage of goods have been analysed.

Modern juristic persons often are powerful entities and they play an influential role in society. Their activities are often accompanied by serious transgressions that have a severely detrimental impact on human beings and their environment. The effective prosecution of juristic persons is therefore necessary. The juridical foundations of the liability of juristic persons are, however, one of the most controversial issues in criminal law theory. Individualistic theories postulate that juristic persons are merely collections of individuals. The conduct and fault of individuals constituting a juristic person must therefore form the basis of the criminal liability of the juristic person. In the United States, for instance, the foundation for the criminal liability of corporations on federal level is vicarious liability. Another individualistic model (mostly associated with English common law jurisdictions) is the so–called doctrine of identification. Only the conduct of individuals who are regarded as the 'directing minds' of the organisation may be attributed to the organisation. These approaches deny the complex structures and decision making processes that exist especially in big corporate entities. According to realistic theories juristic persons are entities which are not dependant on their composite members. Each juristic person has its own unique personality. The culture and ethos of a juristic person influence the conduct of individuals attached to it as well as the degree in which the juristic person abides by the law. The identity of a corporation can be established by investigating the internal structure thereof. The existence of monitoring mechanisms and educational programmes within the organization, as well as the degree to which the organisation condones or disapproves of unlawful conduct, are some of the factors which may be indicative of the corporate culture. This approach is a development of the late twentieth century and has recently been adopted in the legislation of some foreign legal systems, most notably Australia. Section 332(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides the basis for the criminal liability of juristic persons in South Africa. In essence the conduct and fault of functionaries (and sometimes even outsiders) are attributed to the juristic person. In terms of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act juristic persons may only be fined upon conviction. This approach reflects the individualistic view of corporate criminal liability. In this study recommendations are made for the purpose of improving the South African law in this regard so as to reflect a more realistic approach. The recommendations are based on an examination of realistic models proposed by legal and social theorists and legislation adopted by foreign countries which are based on these theories. It is also recommended that more sentencing options must be made available to bring about the restructuring of corporations which have committed crimes.