Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2017 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Hutzler, Fernanda Souza |
Orientador(a): |
Gonçalves, Ionas Deda |
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/20708
|
Resumo: |
The theme of judicial activism has recently attracted the attention of law enforcers. The first part of this work aims to show a general framework on the issue of current judicial protagonism, starting with a brief history on the most influential schools of "Law Theories", with emphasis on positivism and post-positivism, until the Federal Constitution of 1988 and neo-constitutionalism. It also deals with the distinction between the common law and civil law systems, as well as the approximation between the two systems in Brazil. In the second part, it deals with the various concepts of judicial activism found in the doctrine, opting to adopt a multidimensional concept and establishing the parameters and controls foreseen in the ordination, and to clarify their difference with the themes of the Judicialisation and the judicial self-restraint. In the third part of the work, it is demonstrated that activism is a worldwide trend in comparative law, citing as an example, as the movement in the United States of America, Germany, Italy, Spain and Colombia, pointing out the points in common with Brazilian law. In its fourth part, it proposes to outline a course of application of judicial activism in the framework of Social Security law, seeking to deal with the constitutional principles of social security as a limiting of judicial activism. It concludes by bringing controversial decisions and issues (precedents) analyzed by the Judiciary, in matters of social security, where, in some cases, judicial activism has been applied to the achievement of fundamental social rights and to remedy omissions of the powers Legislative and Executive in the effect of public policies, however, in others, under the mantle of the principle of human dignity and equality, the dictates of the law have been overcome, thereby revealing, oscillations of the Judiciary in the application of the law insurance |