• JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
 
  Bookmark and Share
 
 
Master's Dissertation
DOI
https://doi.org/10.11606/D.2.2020.tde-04052021-214431
Document
Author
Full name
Fernanda Kontic da Rocha Azevedo
Institute/School/College
Knowledge Area
Date of Defense
Published
São Paulo, 2020
Supervisor
Committee
Bonizzi, Marcelo José Magalhães (President)
Alvim, Teresa Celina de Arruda
Aurelli, Arlete Inês
Puoli, José Carlos Baptista
Title in Portuguese
Contraditório nas decisões paradigmáticas: julgamentos repetitivos e incidentes de assunção de competência
Keywords in Portuguese
Acesso à justiça
Common Law
Contraditório
Decisão judicial
Direito Processual Civil
Julgamento
Recurso
Abstract in Portuguese
As decisões paradigmáticas são aquelas proferidas em sede de julgamento por amostragem. No Direito Processual Civil atual há três técnicas dessa espécie: os Recursos Especiais e Extraordinários Repetitivos, o Incidente de Resolução de Demandas Repetitivas e o Incidente de Assunção de Competência. Em todas elas os efeitos da decisão podem afetar não só os sujeitos do processo, como também terceiros e, quiçá, toda a sociedade. Dessa forma, para que haja certa garantia de participação e acesso à justiça, é necessário ampliar o contraditório. Existem mecanismos para isso, notadamente a participação de amicus curiae e as audiências públicas. Juntamente com a participação deve ser garantido aos interessados o poder de influência, que tem umbilical relação com a motivação da decisão paradigmática. Da mesma maneira, para a aplicação da decisão paradigmática, deve ser proporcionado às partes o debate, permitindo a manifestação acerca da utilização do paradigma. O presente estudo aborda a importância e os limites da ampliação do contraditório nos julgamentos por amostragem.
Title in English
Contradictory in decisions paradigmatic: repetitive judgments and incidents of assumption of competence
Keywords in English
Contradictory
Precedent ,Assumption of Competence
Repetitive Demands Resolution Incident
Repetitive Resources
Abstract in English
Paradigmatic decisions are those made by judging by sampling. In current civil procedural law there are three techniques of this kind: repetitive appeals, the repetitive claims resolution incident, and the assumption of jurisdiction. In the three techniques, the effects of the decision affect not only the parties, but other people, in some cases, the whole society. Thus, in order to have a certain guarantee of participation and access to justice, it is necessary to o broaden the debate. There are mechanisms for this, notably the participation of amicus curiae and public hearings. Along with participation, the possibility of influence should be guaranteed to the ones who have interested on the opinion, and there is an strong relation between the reasoning of the paradigmatic decision. Likewise, for the application of the paradigm, the parties should be allowed to debate, manifesting about the use of the precedent This paper will study the importance and the limits of the widening of the contradictory in the judgments by sampling.
 
WARNING - Viewing this document is conditioned on your acceptance of the following terms of use:
This document is only for private use for research and teaching activities. Reproduction for commercial use is forbidden. This rights cover the whole data about this document as well as its contents. Any uses or copies of this document in whole or in part must include the author's name.
There are withheld file due to requirements (data publishing, patents or rights).
Release Date
2023-05-04
Publishing Date
2021-05-21
 
WARNING: Learn what derived works are clicking here.
All rights of the thesis/dissertation are from the authors
CeTI-SC/STI
Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations of USP. Copyright © 2001-2022. All rights reserved.