Bibliographie sélective OHADA

This thesis seeks to resolve the ambiguities surrounding the use of the unfair labour practice relating to the provision of “benefits” as a dispute resolution mechanism in South African labour law. This mechanism has been plagued with uncertainty, primar-ily because of the lack of a statutory definition of benefits. Evidently, the interpretation and application of benefits have been left to the courts, resulting in two diverse ap-proaches being endorsed. The first one sought to confer a narrow connotation on ben-efits, the rationale being to separate benefits from the definition of “remuneration”. It further sought to limit the use of this unfair labour practice to instances where the benefit claimed was exclusively provided for ex contractu or ex lege. The primary ob-jective was to protect the divide between disputes of right and disputes of interest, a distinction that is recognised and encouraged in our law. The second approach was one that fostered an expansive interpretation of the term, deeming it to be part of re-muneration. Needless to say it resulted in countless items being subject to determina-tion as benefit disputes. Furthermore, it extended benefits beyond those rooted in con-tract or legislation, including those granted or offered subject to the exercise of mana-gerial discretion. The supplementary challenges firstly relate to the absence of statutory direction on the standards of fairness to be applied in evaluating employer conduct. Secondly, the judiciary has provided opportunities for employees to utilise recourse other than the unfair labour practice provisions to address benefit disputes. Such leeway comes in the form of contractual recourse as well as the ability to institute strike action. In search of solutions to the problems identified above, the study explores and anal-yses the history of the unfair labour practice concept. Thereafter, an extensive exam-ination of the developments in this area of the law is undertaken. This includes a com-prehensive analysis of legislation, case law and academic writings. Having docu-mented and analysed the South African position both pre- and post-democracy, the study critically evaluates these sources of law. The study further involves a diagnostic assessment of international legal instruments and foreign law in order to extract best practices. The conclusions reached are, firstly, that an expansive interpretation of benefits is warranted. This is in line with a purposive interpretation of the LRA, which promotes the constitutional right to fair labour practices and international law. This study there-fore proposes a wide-ranging definition of the term benefits. Secondly, standards of substantive and procedural fairness have been found to be applicable in evaluating employer conduct. As such, fairness guidelines based on these standards have been developed. Thirdly, in respect of the alternate avenues available to resolve benefit disputes, it has been found that although there are strong indicators that point to a conclusion that contractual recourse has been supplanted by statutory recourse, such a finding cannot be definitively made. Furthermore, section 64(4) as it stands provides for the right to strike over unilateral changes to terms and conditions of employment, which includes unilateral changes to pre-existing benefits. However, the judiciary can limit the use of this section in benefit disputes by prioritising the substance of the dis-pute over its form. This thesis ultimately proposes the incorporation of a Code of Good Practice into the LRA. The Code of Good Practice: Benefits adopts the principal research findings of this study. It encourages the enforcement of benefit disputes through the dispute res-olution institutions set up by the LRA. The adoption of this Code (The Code of Good Practice: Benefits) will bring certitude to this field of labour law.

A priori, l’Union africaine, avec son programme pour le développement de l’Afrique connu sous le nom de NEPAD, peut être considérée comme un « moulin à prières ». Ce, en raison de nombreux documents internationaux adoptés à l’échelle régionale africaine, et de l’étroite marge de manoeuvre qu’a l’Union africaine pour trouver des solutions durables aux crises économiques et sociales qui secouent l’Afrique. Crises ayant des incidences sur l’environnement. En effet, depuis l’avènement de l’Union africaine, le développement durable est devenu dans les textes le principe directeur du processus d’intégration africaine. Cette étude analyse les efforts de l’Union africaine en vue de l’effectivité des normes du développement durable en Afrique, ainsi que la contribution de l’Afrique à l’évolution du droit international. L’analyse de l’effectivité des normes de développement durable à l’échelle régionale africaine s’est faite en deux étapes. Premièrement, on a analysé la positivité des normes africaines de développement durable dans l’ordre juridique africain au regard des standards internationaux en la matière. Deuxièmement, on a analysé la mise en oeuvre régionale des normes africaines de développement durable au regard des prescriptions des standards internationaux en la matière. Audelà de la priorisation de l’économique et du social, la façon dont l’Union africaine concilie les trois piliers du développement durable a été mise en relief. Ce travail contribue à mettre en lumière l’approche juridique de l’Union africaine vis-à-vis du développement durable, et montre comment ce concept se matérialise d’une façon particulière en Afrique. Elle analyse, d’une part, les initiatives de l’Union africaine pour traduire dans les faits les trois piliers du développement durable. Et, d’autre part, les obligations que l’Union africaine impose à ses États membres pour mettre en oeuvre ces piliers. Cette étude est également destinée à favoriser la compréhension de l’évolution de la notion de développement, de droit au développement, de développement durable, et elle met en évidence le lien entre le droit et le développement. Enfin, ce travail contribue à mettre en exergue les avancées du droit international sur la remise en cause de la notion de droit subjectif et la consécration de l’existence des « droits sans sujet » en droit international public, à travers le concept de développement durable.

Abstract : Please refer to full text to view abstract. <br>LL.M. (Commercial Law)

Illegal workers have been and continue to be the most vulnerable category of employees in the labour market, the reason for this is the invalidity of their employment contract due to illegality. For the longest time, the Labour Relations Act (hereinafter the LRA) has not been able to afford these workers protection because they did not fall within the ambit of the legal definition of ‘employee’ and the Act only recognises employees as holders of the rights provided for under the LRA. As a result of the Act not being able to protect these workers, they have become victims of exploitation and vicious abuse in the hands of their employers, making them vulnerable in their employment relationship. The law concerning illegal workers has since changed. Courts have found that these workers are in fact employees for the purposes of the LRA, and that, for an employment relationship to exist there need not be a valid employment contract in existence. An employment relationship may take various forms and the goal that the Labour Relations Act seeks to achieve is to protect those employees who find themselves vulnerable as a result of the illegality of their employment contract. It has also been argued that the law aims mostly at penalising the employer rather than the employee who is economically and socially weaker than the employer, therefore, courts have found that the Labour Relations Act should be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (hereinafter the Constitution) which requires a wider interpretation of who may be afforded the right to fair labour practices.

Please refer to full text to view abstract. <br>LL.M. (Commercial Law)

No abstract provided.

Please refer to full text to view abstract. <br>LL.M. (International Commercial Law)

Article 6.8 of the Antidumping Agreement (AD) allows domestic investigating authorities to make determinations on the basis of the best information available (BIA) when any interested party does not cooperate during an antidumping investigation under the discipline of Annex II of the AD. Since its introduction, this provision has been the source of extensive and neverending litigation in front of both domestic investigating authorities and the Dispute Settlement Body. In this thesis, we research to what extent the findings of the Panels and the Appellate Body regarding Article 6.8 AD are consistent with the mandate set out in Articles 3.2, 11 DSU and 17.6 AD and to what extent they are reasonable from an economic perspective. To answer the first question, we first discuss Articles 3.2, 11 DSU and 17.6 AD to establish what is the mandate of the Panels and the Appellate Body under the Dispute Settlement Body. We then examine the findings of the Panels and the Appellate Body in the interpretation of the seven terms of Article 6.8 AD under the previously established mandate. To answer the second question, we summarize the latest developments in the economic theory of adjudication and litigation. We then discuss the findings of the Panels and the Appellate Body using this economic standard. In the conclusion, we compare the results of our analysis with current negotiations on Article 6.8 AD in the Doha Round framework and further discuss the opportunity to create a single united international investigating authority.

Please refer to full text to view abstract. <br>LL.M. (Commercial Law)

Please refer to full text to view abstract. <br>LL.M. (Commercial Law)

Şirket birleşmelerinde ortakların korunması, belirlediği ilkeler ve tanıdığı dava hakları nazara alındığında, kanun koyucunun özel önem atfettiği hususlardan biridir. Devrolunan şirketin ortaklarının, mevcut pay ve haklarını karşılayacak değerde, devralan şirket pay ve haklarını iktisap etmesi esastır. Birleşmenin ortakların malvarlığı cephesinde yarattığı olumsuz sonuçlar, ortaklığın devamlılığı ilkesi çerçevesinde, denkleştirme davası ile denetlenmektedir (TTK m. 191). Bu davada ortaklar, pay ve haklarının gereğince korunmamış veya ayrılma akçesinin uygun belirlenmemiş olması gerekçesiyle, uygun bir denkleştirme isteyebilirler. Öte yandan, Kanun'un birleşmeye ilişkin hükümlerinin ihlali, yine ortakların açabileceği, özel iptal davası ile denetlenmektedir (TTK m. 192). Kanun koyucu, ilgili hükümlerin ihlaline iptal sonucunu bağlamakta; ancak eksikliklerin giderilmesi mekanizması ile bu ağır yaptırımla karşılaşılmaması için devralan şirkete olanak tanımaktadır. Son olarak, birleşme işlemlerine katılan bütün kişilerin, ortaklara karşı kusurları ile vermiş oldukları zararlardan sorumlu oldukları düzenlenerek, ortakların zararlarını tazmin edecek bir özel sorumluluk davası öngörülmektedir (TTK m. 193). Böylece birleşme karşısında ortaklar, üç farklı mekanizma ile koruma altına alınmış olmaktadır. Regarding the principles determined and the right to sue recognized, the protection of the shareholders in the mergers is one of the issues that the legislator attaches special importance to. It is essential that the shareholders of company being acquired attain the shares and rights in the acquiring company equivalent to those in the company being acquired. The negative results of merger on the assets of the shareholders are reviewed by an examination case within the framework of the continuity of the partnership principle (TCC Art. 191). In the present case, the shareholders may demand an appropriate compensation on the grounds that their share and rights are not properly protected or the amount of any cash payment is not determined appropriately. On the other hand, the violation of the provisions of the Law relating to the merger is controlled by a special nullification case, which could be filed by the shareholders (TCC Art. 192). The legislator has concluded the nullification of the violation of the relevant provisions; however, the elimination of deficiencies mechanism allows the acquiring company to avoid it. Finally, it is foreseen a liability case to compensate shareholders' damages that allows all persons participating in the merger transactions are liable for the damages they incurred against the them (TCC Art. 193). Thus, the partners are protected by three different mechanisms against the merger.

The thesis contributes to the debate on the EU’s approach to the business practice of resale price maintenance (RPM), which is widely criticized as too strict and in conflict with what is considered to be the consensus in the economic literature. The thesis critically dissects the economic consensus, on which the critique against the EU’s approach is based, by analyzing the empirical evidence that is cited to support the claim that RPM can frequently be explained by the service-based RPM models and shows that there is no convincing evidence that would support the significance of these positive RPM models that predict positive effects on welfare. To support this finding the thesis collects new evidence by surveying the marketing literature and shows that not only is there no convincing evidence that the positive RPM models frequently apply, but to the contrary there is evidence that these models are inconsistent with the real world phenomenon of RPM. Having refuted the service-based models the thesis takes up the scientific challenge that “it takes a theory to beat a theory” and proposes to fill the gap with three price-based models. The thesis offers an analysis of the three price-based RPM models, first from the perspective of welfare effects and then from a broader economic perspective in an attempt to ultimately show that the EU approach to RPM can be justified based on these economic models. All three models explain the situation in which RPM is used by a branded good manufacturer to create the perception of high quality, which is used either as a credible quality signal, becomes a component of the product or is used to bias the consumer decision; they thus enter the difficult terrain of consumer preference formation and of markets for the intangible components of a product.

Bu çalışmada anonim şirket yönetim kurulu üyelerinin Rekabet Hukukundan kaynaklanan sorumluluğu incelenmiştir. Anonim şirket kural olarak yönetim kurulu tarafından alınan kararlar ile faaliyetini sürdürür. Anonim şirkette yönetim kurulu üyesi olarak görev yapan kişiler birtakım haklara sahip oldukları gibi yükümlülük altına da girerler. Yönetim kurulu üyeleri kanunda kendileri için getirilen yükümlülüklerini ihlal ettikleri takdirde halinde yönetim kurulu üyelerinin hukuki ve cezai sorumluluğuna gidilir. Anonim şirket yönetim kurulunun hukuki sorumluluk sebepleri ve sorumluluğun şartları Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nda ayrıntılı olarak düzenlenmiştir. Yönetim kuruluna yaptırım uygulanabilecek düzenlemeler Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nda düzenleniyor olmakla birlikte, yönetim kurulu üyelerine yaptırım uygulanmasına imkan veren düzenlemeler mevcuttur. Bu düzenlemelerden biri de Rekabetin Korunması Hakkında Kanun'da yer almaktadır. Rekabetin Korunması Hakkında Kanun'un 16'ıncı maddesinde hem teşebbüs yahut teşebbüs birliklerine hem de teşebbüs ve teşebbüs birliğinin yönetici yahut çalışanına yaptırım uygulanmasına imkan veren düzenleme yer almaktadır. Söz konusu düzenleme uyarınca, , anonim şirket rekabeti sınırlayıcı anlaşma, uyumlu eylem ve kararlar, hakim durumun kötüye kullanılması yahut birleşme veya devralma sebebi ile idari para cezasına hükmedilmesi mümkündür. Maddede aynı zamanda Rekabet Kanunu'nun 16'ıncı maddesinin üçüncü fıkrası gereğince teşebbüs veya teşebbüs birliklerine üçüncü fıkrada belirtilen idarî para cezaları verilmesi halinde, ihlalde belirleyici etkisi saptanan teşebbüs veya teşebbüs birliği yöneticilerine ya da çalışanlarına teşebbüs veya teşebbüs birliğine verilen cezanın yüzde beşine kadar idarî para cezası verilebileceğine ilişkin düzenleme yer almaktadır. Çalışmanın birinci kısmında genel olarak Rekabet Hukukuna değinilecektir. İkinci kısmında ise Rekabet Kanunu'nun 16'ıncı maddesinin üçüncü fıkrası uyarınca teşebbüs ve teşebbüs birliklerine uygulanacak yaptırımın şartları ve yaptırımın uygulanması usulü incelenecektir. Çalışmanın son kısmında ise anonim şirket yönetici ve çalışanlarına uygulanacak yaptırımın koşulları ile yaptırımın uygulanması usulü ayrıntılı olacak incelenecektir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Anonim Şirket, Yönetim Kurulu, Rekabet Hukuku, Yönetim Kurulu Üyelerinin Sorumluluğu, Ticaret Hukuku, Rekabetin Korunması Hakkında Kanun. Liabilities of the members of board of directors in joint stock company under competition law is analysed in this study. As a rule, the joint stock company operates with the decisions taken by the board of directors. Persons who are members of the board of directors of a joint stock company have certain rights as well as obligations. If the members of the board of directors violate the obligations imposed on them by law, the members of the board of directors shall be subject to civil and criminal liability. The reasons for the legal responsibility of the joint stock company's board of directors and the conditions of the liability are regulated in detail in the Turkish Commercial Code. Although the regulations that may impose sanctions on the board of directors are regulated in the Turkish Commercial Code, there are regulations allowing sanctions to be imposed on the members of the board of directors. One of these regulations is included in The Act On The Protection Of Competition. Article 16 of The Act On The Protection Of Competition includes the regulation that allows sanctions to be applied to both the undertakings or associations of undertakings and the manager or employee of the association of undertakings and undertakings. According to article it is possible to impose an administrative fine on the basis of an agreement, concerted practices and decisions restricting competition, abuse of dominant position or merger or acquisition. According to article 16/3, in case administrative fines mentioned in paragraph three are imposed on undertakings or associations of undertakings, an administrative fine up to five percent of the penalty imposed on the undertaking or association of undertakings shall be imposed on managers or employees of the undertaking or association of undertakings who are found to have a decisive influence in the infringement. In the first part of the study, Competition Law will be discussed in general. In the second part, the conditions of the sanction to be applied to the undertakings and associations of undertakings and the method of enforcement of sanctions in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 16 of the Act On The Protection Of Competition will be examined. In the last part of the study, the conditions of sanction to be applied to the managers and employees of joint stock companies and the procedure of sanction will be examined in detail. Keywords: Joint Stock Company, Board Of Directors, Competition Law, Liabilities Of The Members Of Board Of Directors, Commercial Law, The Act On The Protection Of Competition.