Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2017 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Souza, Marco Aurélio Queiroz de
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Pulino, Daniel |
| 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: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/20745
|
Resumo: |
This dissertation aims at the study of the right to special retirement in the Social Security System (SSS), taking into account the activities in which there is exposure to agents harmful to the health or physical integrity of the public servant (article 40, § 4º, III, of CF/88). Faced with the absence of a federal regulatory standard, it is intended to question, in the light of the Federal Constitution, infraconstitutional norms and court decisions, the adoption of differentiated requirements and criteria for granting the benefit. In attempting to sediment the study, one draws an approach to historical evolution; concept and legal nature of special retirement; the exposure of public servants to harmful agents and the association of agents; the documents necessary for proving the right; the use of protective equipment; and the position of the Federal Supreme Court (FSC) in the enforcement of the right to special retirement of the public servant by injunction orders, with the subsequent edition of Binding Summary 33, which determined the application, by analogy, of Law n. 8,213/91. On the other hand, it focuses on the contested aspects and on the legislative competence of the federated entities to establish, in their scope, general rules and specific rules on special retirement. It concludes with the presentation of Draft Complementary Law n. 555/2010 and Proposed Constitutional Amendment n. 287/2016, as well as judged by some Courts of Accounts |
