O incidente de resolução de demandas repetitivas no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro
The existence of different judgments for identical crises of law, in the same historical moment, cannot have space in face of the fundamental guarantee of democracy, in which everyone must be equal before the law. In an attempt to solve this wounds of the Judiciary, there were a series of legislativ...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | tesis de maestría |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
| Repositorio: | Repositório Institucional da PUC_SP |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.pucsp.br:handle/24264 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/24264 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO Direito Processual Civil Incidente de resolução de demandas repetitivas (IRDR) Microssistema de casos repetitivos Civil Procedure Law Repetitive claims resolution incident Microsystem of repetitive cases |
| Sumario: | The existence of different judgments for identical crises of law, in the same historical moment, cannot have space in face of the fundamental guarantee of democracy, in which everyone must be equal before the law. In an attempt to solve this wounds of the Judiciary, there were a series of legislative innovations, not only in Brazil, that agitated the legal community. One of them was the creation of the repetitive claims resolution incident. Within this reality, this study seeks to systematically analyze the aforementioned institute, starting from the inspiration for its creation, addressing its controversial legal nature, going through the intricate discussion about its constitutionality, as well as analyzing its main aspects, such as: assumptions of admissibility, standing, competente jurisdiction, procedure, application and onverruling of the precedent. A systematic and finalistic interpretation of the rules related to this mechanism is presented, which the result of a thorough analysis of the legal system and doctrine, which, in the end, makes it possible to glimpse the legitimacy and effectiveness of the institute in realize its main purpose (legal certainty and equal protection), in addition to the achievement of secondary objectives (principle of speedy trial and procedural economy) |
|---|