O conhecimento de matérias de ordem pública no âmbito do plano de recuperação judicial

• Ano de defesa: 2021
• Autor(a) principal: Garcia, Julia Nolasco
• Orientador(a): Shimura, Sergio Seiji
• 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: Brasil - [Lei n. 11.101, de 9 de fevereiro de 2005]; Normas de ordem pública; Recuperação judicial (Direito) - Leis e legislação - Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Brazil [Law n. 11.101/2005]; Public order standards; Judicial recovery - Laws and legislation - Brazil
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/24187

The aim of this dissertation is to analyze which rules within the scope of Law No. 11.101/2005 have been recognized as public policy ones, in particular those which are part of the judicial reorganization plan. We will also investigate which approach the precedents of the Superior Court of Justice in São Paulo, on appeal phase, have actually favored. The study initially addresses the concepts of public policy and public policy rule. Besides those ones, it also discusses the regime applicable to public policy rules of a procedural nature and if it would also be appropriate to public policy rules of a material nature. It is also examined if the competent court, at any time and court tier, has ex officio familiarity with the public policy matter. This without implying a violation of the principle of the prohibition of reformatio in pejus, in view of the manifestation of the translative effect of appeal. Based on this analysis, the study focus on the judicial reorganization doctrine, highlighting the judicial reorganization plan. It emphasizes the extent to which the judiciary branch can control plan content. Furthermore, the work sets out to show that the provisions contained in the reorganization plan that oppose public policy rules represent one of the hypotheses in which control of legality by the competent court is admitted. In this respect, it will be addressed in which situations the judiciary branch has officially recognized the illegality of certain provisions provided for in the judicial reorganization plan, on the grounds of violating public policy rules established by Law 11.101/2005. In practice, the knowledge of these matters legitimates the idea that the differentiated regime to procedural public policy rules has been applied to the material public policy rules that regulate the judicial reorganization plan