Questões de Concurso

    In Brazil, federal and state court systems have used technology in the last years, but the experience and coverage is mixed. In the early 1990s, one of the major initiatives of the federal judiciary has been the computerization of electoral courts. This experience and other reforms have motivated some states judiciaries to advance court automation in different jurisdictions, in aspects such as public information, case management, and document archiving. Studies indicate that the needs for information technology and communications use are rising as many state court systems lag1 behind in investments.
    The modernization of the documentary archives of the federal judiciary is a fairly recent initiative that has been motivated by a growing concern for the preservation of the country's historical archive, and by the need to manage the exponential growth of current archives. Paper archives constitute an enormous investment in terms of time and space, documents deteriorate or are lost, and information retrieval can be laborious. The modernization of archives involves not only the rationalization of existing resources and collections, but also the introduction of new technologies for the electronic storage and retrieval of current documents.
    In May 1998, the Supreme Federal Tribunal initiated a project of reform, and in early 2000 carried out a survey to identify the problem areas relating to infrastructure, access, archiving policy, training and management strategies. The survey results constitute an important first step in the development of a long-term technical and administrative policy for the management of judicial archives.
Follow on work has so far collected information from all the archiveholding judicial institutions in the area of the capital, Brasília. There are on average 4 archivists per institution, which means one archivist for every 751 meters of documents. The technical equipment is for the most part antiquated, with only 37% of archives equipped with computer terminals. Most of the judicial archives do not, therefore, have either the technical or personnel resources necessary for the efficient management, storage and retrieval of documents.

¹lag – a delay between two things happening.

Internet: www.pogar.org (adapted).

Based on the passage above, it is correct to say that

    In Brazil, federal and state court systems have used technology in the last years, but the experience and coverage is mixed. In the early 1990s, one of the major initiatives of the federal judiciary has been the computerization of electoral courts. This experience and other reforms have motivated some states judiciaries to advance court automation in different jurisdictions, in aspects such as public information, case management, and document archiving. Studies indicate that the needs for information technology and communications use are rising as many state court systems lag1 behind in investments.
    The modernization of the documentary archives of the federal judiciary is a fairly recent initiative that has been motivated by a growing concern for the preservation of the country's historical archive, and by the need to manage the exponential growth of current archives. Paper archives constitute an enormous investment in terms of time and space, documents deteriorate or are lost, and information retrieval can be laborious. The modernization of archives involves not only the rationalization of existing resources and collections, but also the introduction of new technologies for the electronic storage and retrieval of current documents.
    In May 1998, the Supreme Federal Tribunal initiated a project of reform, and in early 2000 carried out a survey to identify the problem areas relating to infrastructure, access, archiving policy, training and management strategies. The survey results constitute an important first step in the development of a long-term technical and administrative policy for the management of judicial archives.
Follow on work has so far collected information from all the archiveholding judicial institutions in the area of the capital, Brasília. There are on average 4 archivists per institution, which means one archivist for every 751 meters of documents. The technical equipment is for the most part antiquated, with only 37% of archives equipped with computer terminals. Most of the judicial archives do not, therefore, have either the technical or personnel resources necessary for the efficient management, storage and retrieval of documents.

¹lag – a delay between two things happening.

Internet: www.pogar.org (adapted).

Based on the passage above, it is correct to say that

Mr. Law´s invention

    Less than a year ago the judges on the reality programme Dragon´s Den rejected his invention. Now inventor Rob Law is having the last laugh after a product considered “worthless” on the BBC television programme for young entrepreneurs has proved a huge commercial hit.
    Mr. Law, 29, from Bath, spent 11 years – and 17,000 pounds of his own money – refining his design for a wheelie suitcase which doubles up as a child´s ride-on toy. The plastic Trunki case is designed to allow youngsters aged three to six to take their own bag on holiday – and sit on it when they are tired. But when Mr. Law appeared on Dragons´ Den last September, he was given a hard time by the famously unfriendly panel of investors.
    Businessman Theo Paphitis ridiculed the product after managing to pull off one of the straps. His colleague Deborah Meadon, head of a holiday firm, declared bluntly that there was no market for the case. And the notoriously brusque tele-communications tycoon Peter Jones declared: “I meet people like you all the time – you think you have something. I tell you, you don´t”. The panel declined Mr. Law´s offer to give up 10 percent of his new company in return for a 100,000 pounds investment – an offer which valued the firm at 1 million.
    However, it now appears that the experts were wrong. After a succession of positive press reviews, Mr. Law has sold 85,000 of his trunki suitcases. It is marketed in 22 countries via a network of distributors. Retailing at 25 pounds, it has proved a hit at several high street stores. Mr Law said: “When I went on to the programme I was full of confidence that I was going to get the investment I needed. But they were rude and obnoxious and just focused on the strap, which was actually something that was easily fixed. I was terrified that by appearing on the programme I may have ruined my company before it even started. But afterwards we had loads of hits on the website from people who said they thought it was a brilliant idea. Now I am absolutely delighted to have proved the Dragons wrong. It just goes to show you should never give up.
    Mr. Law also revealed that during filming he managed to sell two of the suitcases to Australian panellist Richard Farleigh, who wanted to invest 100,000 pounds in return for half of the company. But Mr. Law rejected the deal. He declined to say exactly how much the company – which is 100% owned by him - is now worth, but said it was more than a million.

(Adapted from New English File Upper, Oxford, 1996)

Mr. Law´s invention

    Less than a year ago the judges on the reality programme Dragon´s Den rejected his invention. Now inventor Rob Law is having the last laugh after a product considered “worthless” on the BBC television programme for young entrepreneurs has proved a huge commercial hit.
    Mr. Law, 29, from Bath, spent 11 years – and 17,000 pounds of his own money – refining his design for a wheelie suitcase which doubles up as a child´s ride-on toy. The plastic Trunki case is designed to allow youngsters aged three to six to take their own bag on holiday – and sit on it when they are tired. But when Mr. Law appeared on Dragons´ Den last September, he was given a hard time by the famously unfriendly panel of investors.
    Businessman Theo Paphitis ridiculed the product after managing to pull off one of the straps. His colleague Deborah Meadon, head of a holiday firm, declared bluntly that there was no market for the case. And the notoriously brusque tele-communications tycoon Peter Jones declared: “I meet people like you all the time – you think you have something. I tell you, you don´t”. The panel declined Mr. Law´s offer to give up 10 percent of his new company in return for a 100,000 pounds investment – an offer which valued the firm at 1 million.
    However, it now appears that the experts were wrong. After a succession of positive press reviews, Mr. Law has sold 85,000 of his trunki suitcases. It is marketed in 22 countries via a network of distributors. Retailing at 25 pounds, it has proved a hit at several high street stores. Mr Law said: “When I went on to the programme I was full of confidence that I was going to get the investment I needed. But they were rude and obnoxious and just focused on the strap, which was actually something that was easily fixed. I was terrified that by appearing on the programme I may have ruined my company before it even started. But afterwards we had loads of hits on the website from people who said they thought it was a brilliant idea. Now I am absolutely delighted to have proved the Dragons wrong. It just goes to show you should never give up.
    Mr. Law also revealed that during filming he managed to sell two of the suitcases to Australian panellist Richard Farleigh, who wanted to invest 100,000 pounds in return for half of the company. But Mr. Law rejected the deal. He declined to say exactly how much the company – which is 100% owned by him - is now worth, but said it was more than a million.

(Adapted from New English File Upper, Oxford, 1996)

Mr. Law´s invention

    Less than a year ago the judges on the reality programme Dragon´s Den rejected his invention. Now inventor Rob Law is having the last laugh after a product considered “worthless” on the BBC television programme for young entrepreneurs has proved a huge commercial hit.
    Mr. Law, 29, from Bath, spent 11 years – and 17,000 pounds of his own money – refining his design for a wheelie suitcase which doubles up as a child´s ride-on toy. The plastic Trunki case is designed to allow youngsters aged three to six to take their own bag on holiday – and sit on it when they are tired. But when Mr. Law appeared on Dragons´ Den last September, he was given a hard time by the famously unfriendly panel of investors.
    Businessman Theo Paphitis ridiculed the product after managing to pull off one of the straps. His colleague Deborah Meadon, head of a holiday firm, declared bluntly that there was no market for the case. And the notoriously brusque tele-communications tycoon Peter Jones declared: “I meet people like you all the time – you think you have something. I tell you, you don´t”. The panel declined Mr. Law´s offer to give up 10 percent of his new company in return for a 100,000 pounds investment – an offer which valued the firm at 1 million.
    However, it now appears that the experts were wrong. After a succession of positive press reviews, Mr. Law has sold 85,000 of his trunki suitcases. It is marketed in 22 countries via a network of distributors. Retailing at 25 pounds, it has proved a hit at several high street stores. Mr Law said: “When I went on to the programme I was full of confidence that I was going to get the investment I needed. But they were rude and obnoxious and just focused on the strap, which was actually something that was easily fixed. I was terrified that by appearing on the programme I may have ruined my company before it even started. But afterwards we had loads of hits on the website from people who said they thought it was a brilliant idea. Now I am absolutely delighted to have proved the Dragons wrong. It just goes to show you should never give up.
    Mr. Law also revealed that during filming he managed to sell two of the suitcases to Australian panellist Richard Farleigh, who wanted to invest 100,000 pounds in return for half of the company. But Mr. Law rejected the deal. He declined to say exactly how much the company – which is 100% owned by him - is now worth, but said it was more than a million.

(Adapted from New English File Upper, Oxford, 1996)