Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2016 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Cabezas, Mariana de Souza
 |
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/7031
|
Resumo: |
The present master thesis deals with a new mechanism introduced by the new Brazilian Civil Procedure Code, called urgent interim relief , which stabilizes the effects of decisions that grant advance protection. Such interim relief is required in an anticipatory manner, prior to the defendant s response; in case the relief is granted and no appeal is filed against it aiming to invalidate, revoke or reform it, within two years, then the decision is stabilized. The matter was addressed under the perspective that this mechanism was included by the Brazilian legislator among other mechanisms of different jurisdictional reliefs, granted in summary proceedings, in which the adversary system is not only postponed, but also depends on the interested party s request for it to happen. The analysis carried out herein took the new approach given to the constitutional concept of jurisdictional relief as a starting point; thus, it encompasses the objective of enhancing several principles and rights protected by the due process of law guarantee, which included the principles of effectiveness, adversarial system, full defense and the right to trial within a reasonable time. Historically, the grant of jurisdictional reliefs has always been linked to an ordinary process that privileged a full examination of the facts involved in the controversy, thus worshiping the principles of certainty and legal safety. Such dogma was overruled, along with other ones, and the main reason for it derived from giving autonomy for these interim reliefs. However, controversies always arise from major changes; therefore, this thesis also analyzes the setbacks generally mentioned concerning the stabilization of this interim relief, as well as verifies its possible comparison with the effects caused by res judicata |