6 results on '"Intervenor"'
Search Results
2. Stranska intervencija v novejši sodni praksi
- Author
-
Cerar, Pia and Galič, Aleš
- Subjects
court practice ,stranska udeležba ,sodna praksa ,pravdni postopek ,intervention interest ,legal interest ,civil proceedings ,udc:347.921.3(497.4)(043.2) ,pravni interes ,stranska intervencija ,stranski udeleženec ,intervenor ,stranski intervenient ,intervencijski interes ,third party intervention - Abstract
Stranska intervencija je institut, ki posamezniku omogoča udeležbo v tujem postopku zato, da zavaruje lasten pravni interes. Za njegovo vključitev v pravdni postopek je ključen intervencijski interes, katerega vsebino je izoblikovala sodna praksa. Ta je podan, kadar je intervenient z eno izmed strank v materialnopravnem razmerju tako, da utegne sodba posredno vplivati na njegov pravni položaj oz., kadar bi neugodna odločba vplivala na razmerje med njima. Oseba, ki se kot stranski udeleženec v postopek uspešno vključi, lahko praviloma opravlja vsa pravdna dejanja pod pogojem, da so za stranko, ki se ji je v postopku pridružil koristna, jim stranka ne nasprotuje in niso v direktnem nasprotju z njenimi ravnanji. Navedeno je posledica dejstva, da stranski intervenient ni stranka postopka, temveč v pravdi nastopa le kot pomočnik stranke, ki skrbi za njene pravne interese in koristi, pri tem pa posredno varuje lasten pravni položaj. V nalogi Stranska intervencija v novejši sodni praksi ugotavljam, da so procesne določbe na področju stranske intervencije mestoma nejasne in pomanjkljive, zaradi česar je natančnejši pravni položaj, ter pogoje in zahteve, ki jih mora stranski udeleženec za vstop v postopek izpolnjevati, zapolnila in izoblikovala sodna praksa. Naloga se primarno osredotoča na analizo sodne prakse s področja pravdnega postopka, s primerjalno analizo ureditve stranske intervencije na področju upravnih postopkov in krajšo analizo s področja upravnih sporov. Third party intervention is an institute that enables an individual to take part in third-party proceedings in order to safeguard his own legal interest. Intervention interest, the content of which is shaped by court practice, is crucial for his inclusion in civil proceedings. This interest exists when an intervenor is in such a substantive relationship with one of the parties that the judgement could indirectly affect his legal position, or when an unfavourable court decision could affect the relationship between the two. A person who successfully joins the procedure as an intervenor can generally perform all procedural acts, provided that they benefit the party he joined in the proceeding, the party does not oppose them and that these acts are not directly contrary to the party’s actions. This is the result of the fact that an intervenor is not a party, but only appears in the procedure as the party’s assistant who is responsible for the party’s legal interests and benefits, thereby indirectly protecting his own legal position. In the dissertation Third party intervention in recent court practice I find that the procedural provisions focusing on third party intervention are unclear and deficient in certain parts, thus a more detailed legal position, terms and requirements that the intervenor must meet to enter a proceeding, have been filled and shaped by court practice. This dissertation focuses primarily on the analysis of court practice covering civil proceedings, with a comparative analysis of third party intervention in the field of administrative proceedings, and a short analysis in the field of administrative disputes. more...
- Published
- 2022
Catalog
3. Implications of Negotiation Theory for Research and Development of Negotiation Support Systems.
- Author
-
Holsapple, Clyde, Hsiangchu Lai, and Whinston, Andrew
- Subjects
- *
BUSINESS negotiation , *SOCIAL support , *RESEARCH & development , *BASIS (Information retrieval system) , *MANAGEMENT science , *COMPUTER systems - Abstract
This paper summarizes a parametric theory of negotiation as a basis forshedding light on negotiation support system possibilities. Previously, thetheory has been used to analyze prior research accomplishments in the area ofnegotiation support systems. Here, we discuss implications of the theory thatare relevant for future research and development of negotiation supportsystems. The implications are concerned with three topics: a high-levelgeneric characterization of these systems, an identification of theirpossible support functions, and a taxonomy for classifying suchsystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] more...
- Published
- 1997
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. INTERVENTION IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE AND A CIVIL PROCEDURE
- Author
-
Hromc, Tomaž and Ferčič, Aleš
- Subjects
Public interest ,upravni organ ,splošni upravni postopek ,udc:346.92(043.2) ,Intervention ,Simple intervention ,sosporniška intervencija ,pravni interes ,Administrative authority ,posebni upravni postopek ,Court ,stranska intervencija ,Characteristic of a party ,intervenient ,Legal interest ,Party ,položaj stranke ,upravni postopek ,civilni pravdni postopek ,lastnost stranke ,stranska udeležba ,Civil procedure ,Intervenor ,Joinder intervention ,stranka ,javni interes ,sodišče ,Administrative procedure ,Status of a party ,stranski udeleženec - Abstract
Upravni in pravdni postopek sta dva bistveno različna postopka. Upravni poteka v okviru javne uprave in ga izvajajo »organi«, s katerimi so mišljeni organi državne uprave in drugi državni organi, organi samoupravnih lokalnih skupnosti, pa tudi pristojni nosilci javnih pooblastil. Bistvo upravnega postopka je odločanje o pravici, obveznosti ali pravni koristi posameznika v konkretni upravni zadevi. Po drugi strani civilni pravdni postopek poteka znotraj sodne veje oblasti, v njegovem okviru pa redna sodišča razrešujejo civilne spore, to je odločajo o spornih pravnih razmerjih oziroma o spornih civilnih pravicah. Temeljne značilnosti obeh postopkov, pa tudi upravnega spora, sem povzel v II. poglavju naloge. V obeh postopkih je (poleg organa oziroma sodišča) nujni subjekt stranka, v upravnem postopku najmanj ena (aktivna ali pasivna), v pravdnem pa vsaj dve (aktivna in pasivna). Poleg strank(e) se lahko tako enega kot drugega postopka udeležujejo tudi stranski udeleženci. Stranski udeleženec upravnega postopka pridobi položaj stranke, ne pa tudi lastnosti stranke. V pravdnem postopku pa je intervencija lahko dveh vrst, navadna ali enostavna in sosporniška. Pri sosporniški intervenciji intervenient dobi položaj enotnega sospornika (in s tem položaj stranke), stranski intervenient pa z vstopom v postopek postane pomočnik stranke, za katere uspeh v pravdi je pravno zainteresiran – ne pridobi pa položaja stranke. Prav razmerjem na relaciji stranka – stranski udeleženec/intervenient – sosporniški intervenient – enotni sospornik – nujni sospornik je posvečena vsebina te diplomske naloge, s tem, da je osrednja pozornost namenjena stranski udeležbi v obeh postopkih. V III. poglavju naloge (podpoglavja 1. – 6.) sem stransko udeležbo v obeh postopkih proučil predvsem z naslednjih vidikov: • Opredelitev stranske udeležbe. • Namen stranske udeležbe. • Procesne in materialne predpostavke stranske udeležbe. • Vstop stranskega udeleženca v postopek. • Pravni položaj stranskega udeleženca v postopku ter njegovo pravno razmerje s stranko, kateri se je v postopku pridružil, oziroma za katere uspeh v pravdi je pravno zainteresan. • Specifične značilnosti posameznega postopka. Na področju upravnega postopka sem bolj podrobno prikazal tudi pravna sredstva stranskega udeleženca ter stroške stranske udeležbe. Na podlagi ugotovljenih značilnosti stranske udeležbe v obeh postopkih sem nato v 7. podpoglavju analiziral podobnosti in razlike stranske udeležbe v obeh postopkih ter opravil krajšo primerjavo med stransko udeležbo v slovenskem in nemškem upravnem in pravdnem postopku. V IV. poglavju sem povzel ugotovitve predhodnih poglavij naloge ter se osredotočil na razloge ugotovljenih podobnosti in razlik stranske udeležbe, pri čemer sem izhajal predvsem iz ciljev, ki jih zasledujeta Zakon o splošnem upravnem postopku in Zakon o pravdnem postopku, iz temeljnih načel obeh postopkov, pa tudi iz načel Ustave, povezanih z obravnavanima postopkoma. Dotaknil pa sem se tudi vprašanj, ki v zvezi s stransko udeležbo ostajajo odprta v strokovni javnosti. Menim, da sem cilje naloge, navedene v »Opredelitvi problema«, dosegel, saj so se v okviru njene vsebine dovolj jasno pokazali odgovori na vprašanja, ki sem si jih zastavil kot problem naloge. An administrative and a civil procedure are two substantially different procedures. An administrative procedure takes place within public administration and is carried out by »administrative authorities« which apply to state administration bodies and other state bodies, authorities of self-government local communities, as well as to competent institutions which are bearers of public authorities. The very essence of an administrative procedure is the determination of the right, obligations or legal entitlement of a natural or legal person in a specific administrative procedure. On the other hand a civil procedure is carried out within the framework of judicial power and within this procedure ordinary courts of law settle civil disputes, that is, they settle either legal relations in dispute or disputed civil rights. I have summarised the basic characteristics of both procedures and of the administrative dispute in section II. of my thesis. In both procedures a party is a necessary entity, besides an authority or a court. In an administrative procedure there is at least one party (an active or passive), in a civil procedure there are at least two parties (an active and passive). In addition to a party/parties intervenors can take part in any of the two procedures. An intervenor of an administrative procedure obtains a status of a party but not a characteristic of a party. In a civil procedure there can be two kinds of interventions, a simple intervention and a joinder intervention. The position of an indispensible party, which obtains the status of a proper party, is characteristic of a joinder intervention, and an intervenor at entering a procedure becomes an assistant of a party and is de jure interested in the success of a law suit but the intervenor does not obtain the status of a party. The content of my thesis is dedicated to the very relations between a party – an intervenor – an additional party – an indispensible party - a necessary party by focusing on intervention in both procedures. In subsections from 1 to 6 of the section III. of my thesis I have examined the intervention in both procedures particularly from the following points of view: • Definition of an intervention. • Purpose of an intervention. • Process and material assumptions of an intervention. • Entering of an intervenor into a procedure. • Legal status of an intervenor in a procedure and their legal relationship with a party which the intervenor joined in the procedure and who is de jure interested in the success of a law suit. • Specific characteristics of an individual procedure. In respect of an administrative procedure I have presented also legal means of an intervenor and the costs of an intervention more in detail. On the basis of identified characteristics of an intervention in both procedures I have then analysed similarities and differences of an intervention in either procedure and I have made a short comparison between an intervention in Slovenian and in German legislative regulations in the subsection 7. In section IV. I have summarised observations of preceding sections of my thesis and I have focused on the reasons for observed similarities and differences of an intervention. I have based my observations particularly on objectives that are regulated by the General Administrative Procedure Act and by the Civil Procedure Act, on basic principles of both procedures, and also on the principles in the Constitution that are connected with the relevant procedures. I have also touched on the questions in connection with an intervention that stay unsolved in expert public. I mean that the objectives of my thesis quoted in the subsection »Definition of the problem« have been achieved, for the answers to the questions that I had raised as a problem in my thesis have shown up sufficiently clear within its contents. more...
- Published
- 2016
5. When Can the Patent Office Intervene in its Own Cases?
- Author
-
Vishnubhakat, Saurabh
- Subjects
- Patent, Agency, Intervenor, Civil Procedure, Appeal, Administrative, Empirical, Inter Partes, Covered Business Method, Post Grant, Collective Action, America Invents Act, IPR, CBM, PTAB, USPTO, AIA, Intellectual Property Law, Law
- Abstract
The rise of administrative patent validity review since the America Invents Act has rested on an enormous expansion of Patent Office authority. A relatively little-known aspect of that authority is the agency's statutory ability to intervene in Federal Circuit appeals from adversarial proceedings in its own Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Patent Office has exercised this intervenor authority frequently and with specific apparent policy objectives, including where one of the adverse parties did not participate in the appeal. Moreover, until recently, there has been no constitutional inquiry into the Article III standing that the Patent Office must establish in order to intervene in this way. The Patent Office's pattern of strategic intervention intersects in important ways with the constitutional limits that the agency must observe. Thus far, every intervenor brief that the agency has filed has been in full or partial defense of the PTAB’s position or of some larger structural value associated with administrative adjudication, never in opposition to the PTAB's stance. Where the Patent Office did choose to intervene on appeal, the outcomes below were usually defeats for the patent owner (about 80%), and the agency's position was to affirm the defeat. And where the Patent Office intervened specifically to stand in for a litigant absent on appeal, the absent litigant was always a prevailing patent challenger — never a prevailing patent owner. Meanwhile, since the Patent Office began intervening in Federal Circuit appeals, the relative share of interventions by private parties has declined, and the remainder has shifted to a pattern of more concentrated, multi-party interventions. This suggests a net offloading onto the Patent Office of the responsibility to intervene. The observed Patent Office preference for specific outcomes and policies is constitutionally important because the agency's ability to intervene will often rest on its ability to show Article III standing. Piggybacking on another party's standing will not always be enough, especially where the litigant in the case below is absent from the appeal or where the agency's position is different (especially broader) than what its friendly appellate party seeks. In light of these findings, the Federal Circuit's forthcoming decision in Knowles Electronics v. Matal, No. 2016-1954, can do much to clarify the constraints upon the use of intervenor authority as an instrument of Patent Office policy. more...
- Published
- 2018
6. Federal Agency Compensation of Intervenors
- Author
-
Steeg, Robert M.
- Published
- 1976
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.