Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2011 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Galizia, Paulo Sérgio Brant de Carvalho
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Nery, Rosa Maria de Andrade |
| 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/5744
|
Resumo: |
Our main goal is to analyze the State s liability in case of omission, in regard of the rule established in the article 37, paragraph 6, of the Brazilian Federal Constitution, by defining its limits, scope, and controversies, specially analyzing the Supreme court´s jurisprudence. It is widely accepted that the State is liable for the damages it causes to the citizens, even in cases of omission, as it would happen when a public service didn t work, was delayed or worked deficiently. The exact extension of its responsibility it far from a consensus in the jurisprudence or among judges. In theory, the State s liability, as stated in the Federal Constitution, is objective, which means that it does not depend on the agent s fault or tort, which are important only in case of regressive action. In case of omission, the subjectiveness of the responsibility takes place, as many don t accept the objective responsibility in such cases, causing division in the jurisprudence. In the great majority, the discussion limits its analyses to the law. One must look further, taking into account sociological and political issues regarded to the rule of law in a democratic state, for example, as in public policies in pursuitof an efficient administration |
