Súmula vinculante

Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: 2008
Autor(a) principal: Traldi, Maurício
Orientador(a): Lopes, João Batista
Banca de defesa: Não Informado pela instituição
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
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: BR
Palavras-chave em Português:
Palavras-chave em Inglês:
Área do conhecimento CNPq:
Link de acesso: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/8278
Resumo: This thesis looks into the main aspects of the doctrine of binding precedent (súmula vinculante), a general and abstract precedent with binding effects incorporated into the Brazilian legal system through Constitutional Amendment 45/04, which included article 103-A and was subsequently regulated by Law 11417/06. This subject was chosen particularly because of the intense debate and controversy that has always surrounded the concept of súmula vinculante in the Brazilian legal community; because it has been in force for a short period; and because of the benefits it was always believed it would bring to those seeking the Judiciary in terms of legal security and equality before the law. This work addresses the following aspects: evaluation of whether case law could be considered a true source of law within the Brazilian legal system; identification of the main features of the Portuguese abstract statement system (assentos) and those of the common-law judicial precedent system (to subsequently allow for identification of the similarities and differences between these and the Brazilian doctrine of súmula vinculante); evaluation of the case law control mechanisms available under the Brazilian legal system; description of the procedural aspects of the súmula vinculante; examination of the advantages of incorporating such doctrine into the Brazilian legal framework, particularly with respect to unification of case law stands and reduction in the number of cases handled by the Judiciary; identification and discussion of the major critical comments normally made against such doctrine; comparison of the doctrine of súmula vinculante with that of the judicial precedent that precludes appeals (súmula impeditiva de recursos). Preparation of this thesis involved research of laws, legal writings and case law in various fields of the law (both Brazilian and foreign). Our findings lead us to the following conclusions: today, case law is a true source of law; the súmula vinculante has few similarities with the Portuguese abstract statement system and the common-law judicial precedent system; the súmula vinculante is an important instrument in achieving a uniform case law and unifying the understanding of normative acts dealing with constitutional matters; it may greatly contribute to reduce the number of cases handled by the Judiciary (especially those dealing repeatedly with the same subject); criticism against the súmula vinculante is not backed by strong arguments; the súmula impeditiva de recursos is unconstitutional; and, finally, we believe that the scope of the súmula vinculante should be extended to include the Higher Court of Justice