A imposição pelo juiz à parte de produção de prova desabonatória no direito processual civil, sob a ótica dos direitos fundamentais de natureza processual

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Porto, Guilherme Athayde
• Orientador(a): Reichelt, Luis Alberto
• 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: Poderes Instrutórios; Prova; Direitos Fundamentais Processuais
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Instructional Powers; Proof; Fundamental Procedural Rights
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/9093

The aim of this paper is to discuss the provocative theme of the probative law, proposing a reflection on the possibility of coexistence between the judge's instructive powers with the fundamental procedural rights of the party, especially the contradictory and freedom. In this line, taking into account the provisions of art. 379 of the CPC, which provides that the party is not required to produce evidence against itself and the discipline of the sole paragraph of art. 400 of the CPC, which establishes the possibility for the court to impose unrestricted coercive, inductive, mandatory and subrogatory measures because of the procedural system's commitment to the search for truth, creates an apparent conflict of legal commands and possible violation of the rights of the parties. This is because, if, on the one hand, the party is not required to produce evidence against itself, on the other hand, the court is allowed to adopt the measures mentioned, which may even oblige the party to bring elements capable of harming him or her. coping solution. At this point, a conflict seems to arise, and the debate needs to be clarified to what extent it is legitimate for the court to participate in the production of evidence without violating the parties' right to defend their position within the process. The question, in the light of a model of collaborative process, in line with the Constitution of the Republic, is to define the limits for the exercise of the judge's instructive powers, since, if exercised with the violation of the rights of the parties, leads to the creation of evidence of illicit origin precisely because it violates not only the freedom of the party, but also the very concept of contradictory, which, in reality, allows the party to influence the formation of the decision in its favor and not against its own interests.