Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2017 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Brito, Alessandra Mizuta de
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Macedo, Elaine Harzheim
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Tese
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito
|
| Departamento: |
Escola de Direito
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/7514
|
Resumo: |
Considering the types of litigation identified by Sergio Menchini (an individual, a collective and a mass) the procedural instruments for the treatment of each of them are identified, considering the individual actions for the protection of individual litigation, based on the Civil Procedural Code; homogenizing and transindividual actions for the treatment of collective litigation, based on the microsystem for collective tutelage that has as support the tripod of the Popular Action Act (Law 4,717 /1965), Public Civil Action Law (Law 7,347/1985) and Code Of Consumer Protection (Law 8.078/1990), guided according to the Federal Constitution of 1988; and the model case (or test case) for the protection of mass litigation. The solutions to collective litigation take into account the interest or collective right that is the object of the action (diffuse, collective in the strict sense or homogeneous individual rights) so that the corresponding rules of legitimation and effects of the res judicata are employed, according to the LACP, article 5 and CDC articles 82 and 103. On the one hand, as the individual actions seek to ensure compliance of the subjective rights of individuals, on the other hand collective actions seek to protect issues of social repercussion of interests and collective rights, it becomes possible to control public policies through the Judiciary Power. Although efforts have been made to deliver legal solutions to mass, postindustrial societies, the complexity of human relations sometimes gives rise to sui generis situations that do not exactly fit into any classification of preconceived solutions, this being the case of actions Pseudoindividuals, which are characterized as actions with the object capable of reaching a collectivity, whose enjoyment is indivisible, but proposed by an individual. It wouldn´t be, therefor, nor individual actions, as a resulto f its objtect, nor collective, for bing proposed by na individual. Thus, it is a general objective of the present study to identify the pseudoindividual actions, in a comparative way, the treatment that is more adequate by observing the rules of individual actions or collective actions. Clarify how individual legitimacy is justified if treated as a public civil action, as well as facing the erga omnes effects of the sentence if treated as an individual action. |
