Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2016 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Pipolo, Henrique Afonso
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Waisberg, Ivo |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Tese
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Direito
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/19589
|
Resumo: |
Law n. 11,101 / 2005 inaugurated a new system for the recovery of companies. Consolidating and positivando constitutional principles, this law established a microsystem that goes against the ideals of post-positivism, to recognize the principles as a normative kind. His art. 47 came positivate the principles of preservation of the company, maintaining the productive source of jobs and the interests of creditors. This study aims to make a critical analysis of the possibility of whether or not the principle of preserving the company in our Courts in the Judicial Recovery processes. The assertiveness of the principle and its application in judicial decisions will be used as premises at work, because there is no doubt such findings. judicial decisions will be studied to demonstrate the effective use of the principle of preservation of the company in bankruptcy proceedings and others in which the misuse is detrimental evident to one party and cause legal uncertainty to the whole community, affecting many sectors. The principle of preserving the company has motivated some judicial decisions to overcome some rules, even when lacking any illegality or unconstitutionality to justify the failure to apply the text of the law or factual situation and even economic that the company is viable, featuring a clear excessive and unjustified use. The argument put forward is that the principle of preserving the company's microsystem of Law. 11.101 / 2005 can only be applied in situations where the legal text is not clear, where there is room for interpretation due to inaccuracy or gap that can be filled by the doctrinal discussion involving the device in question. In cases where the law is clear, without which there is doubt about its contents and interpretation, the principle should not be applied to override the law, without infringing some of the goals envisioned by the microsystem Recovery and Bankruptcy, notably legal certainty and predictability of decisions |
