Submitted by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2017-06-30T18:16:53Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TES_ALESSANDRA_MIZUTA_DE_BRITO_PARCIAL.pdf: 472886 bytes, checksum: 66b919f4120bf6133952cac0429b03d3 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2017-06-30T18:17:02Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TES_ALESSANDRA_MIZUTA_DE_BRITO_PARCIAL.pdf: 472886 bytes, checksum: 66b919f4120bf6133952cac0429b03d3 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-30T18:17:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TES_ALESSANDRA_MIZUTA_DE_BRITO_PARCIAL.pdf: 472886 bytes, checksum: 66b919f4120bf6133952cac0429b03d3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-02-23 / 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. / Considerando os tr?s tipos de litigiosidade identificados por Sergio Menchini (a individual, a coletiva e a massificada) identificam-se os instrumentos processuais para o tratamento de cada uma delas, considerando as a??es individuais para a tutela da litigiosidade individual, com base no C?digo de Processo Civil; as a??es homogeneizantes e transindividuais para o tratamento da litigiosidade coletiva, com base no microssistema para a tutela coletiva que possui como suporte o trip? Lei da A??o Popular (Lei 4.717/1965), Lei da A??o Civil P?blica (Lei 7.347/1985) e C?digo de Defesa do Consumidor (Lei 8.078/1990), balizado pela Constitui??o Federal de 1988; e o processo-modelo (ou test case) para a tutela da litigiosidade de massa. Quanto ?s solu??es para a litigiosidade coletiva leva-se em considera??o o interesse ou direito coletivo objeto da a??o (difuso, coletivo em sentido estrito ou individual homog?neo) para que se empreguem as regras correspondentes de legitima??o e efeitos da coisa julgada, nos termos dos artigos 5? da LACP, 82 do CDC e 103 do CDC. Se por um lado as a??es individuais visam a assegurar a observ?ncia aos direitos subjetivos dos indiv?duos, por outro lado as a??es coletivas procuram tutelar quest?es de repercuss?o social dos interesses e direitos coletivos, torna-se poss?vel controle das pol?ticas p?blicas por meio da atua??o do Poder Judici?rio. Embora tenham se empregado esfor?os para entregar solu??es jur?dicas que atendam ?s sociedades de massa p?s-industriais, a complexidade das rela??es humanas, por vezes, fazem surgir situa??es sui generes que n?o se encaixam exatamente em nenhuma classifica??o de solu??es pr?-concebidas, sendo este o caso das a??es pseudoindividuais, que se caracterizam por serem a??es com objeto capaz de atingir uma coletividade, cuja frui??o ? indivis?vel, por?m proposta por um indiv?duo, hip?tese esta n?o prevista em lei. N?o seriam, portanto, nem a??es individuais, em decorr?ncia de seu objeto, nem coletivas, por ser proposta por um indiv?duo. Assim, constitui-se em objetivo geral do presente trabalho identificar as a??es pseudoindividuais, de forma comparativa assegurar-lhe o tratamento processual mais adequado por meio da observ?ncia das regras das a??es individuais ou das a??es coletivas. Esclarecer de que forma se justifica a legitimidade individual se tratada como a??o civil p?blica, bem como enfrentando a efic?cia erga omnes da senten?a se tratada como a??o individual.