Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-15T19:33:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 BDTD - trabalhos retidos.docx: 11621 bytes, checksum: 0452b8296967440b491d0b515ed6814d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-07-01 / In Brazil, through social rights were recognized, in parallel, the civil and political rights. Even at authoritarian times, social rights have been formally recognized, given that the Federal Constitution of 1988 gave them enormous attention. However, realization of social rights requires, beyond the state action, the commitment of workers and their unions, occupying Article 8., III CF/88 position of prominence in this particular, by allowing the union, as a procedural substitute, to file lawsuits in defense of collective rights (especially of a certain workers class) and homogeneous individual rights of its members. This ensures isonomic access to justice to the members of the class (especially professional), and also decrease the excessive amount of individual claims and increase the number of workers protected. Finally, the most frequent activities of the union as a procedural substitute for workers, beyond strengthening the ties between them, will reduce the low rate of spontaneous compliance of the constitutional and legal norms which enshrine social rights by employers, also reducing, as a result, judicial cases and relieving the Labor Courts. / No Brasil, através dos direitos sociais, foram consagrados, de forma paralela, os direitos civis e políticos. Mesmo em períodos autoritários, os direitos sociais foram reconhecidos formalmente, sendo certo que a Constituição Federal de 1988 deu a eles enorme destaque. Contudo, a concretização dos direitos sociais, além de prestações do próprio Estado, requer o empenho dos trabalhadores e de seus sindicatos, ocupando o artigo 8º., III da CF/88, neste particular, posição de destaque, ao possibilitar que o sindicato, na condição de substituto processual, ajuíze ações em defesa dos direitos coletivos (da categoria profissional, enquanto tal) e dos direitos individuais homogêneos de seus membros. Isso garante aos integrantes da categoria (notadamente profissional) isonomia no acesso à justiça, além de diminuir a quantidade excessiva de reclamações individuais e aumentar o número de trabalhadores tutelados. Por fim, a atuação mais freqüente do sindicato como substituto processual dos trabalhadores, além de fortalecer os laços entre eles, aumentará o baixo índice de cumprimento espontâneo pelos empregadores das normas constitucionais e legais que consagram os direitos sociais, reduzindo também, via de conseqüência, os processos judiciais e desafogando a Justiça do Trabalho.

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:17:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_carolina_izidoro.pdf: 587592 bytes, checksum: cabd445a4be9ccd216774b241232f974 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-11-01 / This paper has the objective to study the arbitration and to verify if this extrajudicial way can be used to solve conflicts of consume. The judicial process is main way that is used by Brazilian to get a solution to their problems. However, because of the difficulties that are generated by the Judiciary Power overfill, such as the inefficiency and the slowness in the jurisdictional solution by this Power, the State has been instigating the population to utilize extrajudicial mechanisms, where we can include the arbitration. The Brazilian legislator gave it a special treatment in the year of 1996, when the Law of Arbitration, known as Marco Maciel Law , was published. Many doctrinaires and the State itself present the arbitration as a fast and able alternative way to resolve disputes, including also those that involve consumers and producers. That study is methodologically inscribed in traditional investigations of the Law, that is to say, it analyses rules contained in the Arbitration Law (n. 9.307/1996) and in the Consumer Defense Code (Law n. 8.078/1990) and it studies the doctrine and jurisprudential understanding. The contribution of this search to the Law consists of verifying if the solution of conflicts where exists, in one side, the producer and, in the other side, the consumer the vulnerable part of the consume relation, which object refers to products and services, through the arbitration, attends the legal and constitutional requisites to obtain a just process, that is to say, it is pretended to analyse if there is legal possibility in the use of the arbitration in the solution of conflicts of consume and if the consumer s interests and rights are really being protected when the consumer controversies are submitted to that private jurisdiction form / Esta dissertação estuda a possibilidade de utilização do instituto da arbitragem e sua pertinência na solução de conflitos de consumo. Sabe-se que o processo judicial é o instrumento ordinário existente no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro para solucionar os conflitos existentes na sociedade. Contudo, em razão das dificuldades decorrentes do abarrotamento do Poder Judiciário, como a ineficiência e a morosidade na solução jurisdicional prestada por esse Poder, o Estado vem fomentando a utilização de mecanismos extrajudiciais, onde se inclui a arbitragem. Esse instituto obteve tratamento especial dado pelo legislador brasileiro em 1996, quando foi publicada a Lei de Arbitragem, conhecida como Lei Marco Maciel . Vários doutrinadores e o próprio Estado apresentam a arbitragem como meio extrajudicial célere e hábil para a solução de contendas, inclusive as que envolvem consumidores e fornecedores. Esse estudo inscreve-se, metodologicamente, nas investigações tradicionais do Direito, ou seja, analisa-se as normas contidas na Lei de Arbitragem (Lei nº 9.307/1996) e no Código de Defesa do Consumidor (Lei nº 8.078/1990) e estuda-se o entendimento de doutrinadores e dados jurisprudenciais. A contribuição dessa pesquisa para o Direito consiste em verificar se a solução dos conflitos onde exista, de um lado, o fornecedor, e, do outro, o consumidor, parte vulnerável da relação jurídica de consumo, cujo objeto refere-se a produtos e serviços, através da arbitragem, atende aos requisitos legais e constitucionais na obtenção de um processo justo, ou seja, pretende-se analisar se há possibilidade legal da utilização da arbitragem na solução de conflitos de consumo e se os interesses e direitos dos consumidores estão sendo realmente protegidos quando as controvérsias consumeiristas são submetidas a essa forma de jurisdição privada

LLM / Department of Criminal and Procedural Law

No description available.

No description available.

L’obligation de coopération a été insérée dans le Code de procédure civile en 2016, tirant ses origines de la procédure civile anglaise. Cette obligation est le point d’ancrage de cette étude, qui a pour objectif non seulement de définir cette nouvelle obligation, mais aussi de démontrer sa complémentarité avec le devoir déontologique de coopérer pour les avocats. L’application concrète de la coopération dans la pratique actuelle de la profession découle de ces deux codes agissant en symbiose. Dans la procédure, la coopération a une place de choix à travers la disposition préliminaire du Code et est qualifiée de principe directeur de la procédure. Elle agit complémentairement avec les notions d’abus de procédure et de bonne foi. L’obligation de coopération s’applique à toutes les étapes du règlement : aux modes privés de prévention et de règlement des conflits, au protocole pré-judiciaire, ainsi que lors de la gestion de l’instance. L’obligation de coopération a également des répercussions importantes en matière de preuve civile. Bien appliquée, elle favorise à la fois la recherche de la vérité par la transmission adéquate des éléments de preuve et l’accessibilité à la justice par la réduction du nombre de procédures. Comme devoir professionnel, la coopération a généralement un impact sur la relation avocat-client et appelle l’avocat à se responsabiliser dans l’accomplissement de ses fonctions. Or, le paysage actuel de la pratique de la profession favorise plutôt l’adversité, notamment parce que la marchandisation et la tarification horaire des services juridiques découragent la coopération entre confrères. Selon nous, il existe néanmoins des solutions concrètes afin de favoriser l’insertion de la coopération dans les différents milieux de pratique. / The obligation of cooperation has enacted in the Code of civil procedure in 2016, inspired by the reform English civil procedure. This obligation is at the heart of this analysis which attempts to define this new obligation and to demonstrate its complementarity with the ethical obligation lawyers has pursuant to the Code of professional Conduct. The practical application of cooperation in lawyer’s modern practice is indeed a mix of those two jurisdictions. In the Code of Civil Procedure, the need for cooperation is described in the preliminary disposition and is expressed as a guiding principle of the procedure at article 20 of the Code. It acts simultaneously with the notions of good faith and abuse of process. The obligation of cooperation is applicable at every step of conflict resolution: to alternative dispute resolution, to pre-judiciary protocol and to case management. The obligation of cooperation also has major repercussions for rules of evidence. When followed properly, it improves not only the research for truth by increasing information exchanges; it also enhances access to justice by reducing the time in court. As a professional obligation, cooperation generally has an impact on lawyer-client relationships and invites the professional to take responsibility for the accomplishment of his functions. However, the professional practice’s landscape does not currently promote cooperation between colleagues, notably because of the commercialisation of legal services and hourly billing. In our opinion though, despite the actual context of legal practice, solutions exist to promote a professional culture based on cooperation.

L'intelligence artificielle est l'un des domaines les plus florissants et les plus passionnants de la recherche et de l'industrie. Au cours des dernières années, les approches utilisant l'apprentissage profond ont permis de nombreuses avancées dans divers domaines, notamment la vision par ordinateur, la traduction automatique, la reconnaissance et la génération d'images, ainsi que la compréhension et la génération de textes (tels que GPT-4). Dans cette thèse, je cherche à savoir si et comment l'intelligence artificielle peut être utilisée pour améliorer l'accès à la justice et à l'information juridique pour les justiciables. Le citoyen moyen est souvent dépassé et impuissant lorsqu'il est confronté à des problèmes juridiques. Il peut avoir du mal à comprendre comment la loi s'applique à sa situation et à utiliser le système juridique pour résoudre son problème, même s'il est conscient de ses droits. En conséquence, leurs problèmes restent irrésolus ou ils ne profitent pas des possibilités qui leur sont offertes. C'est pourquoi j'ai développé et mis en œuvre la méthodologie "JusticeBot", qui utilise l'IA pour aider les justiciables à résoudre leurs problèmes juridiques. Les outils qui en résultent utilisent une approche hybride de raisonnement basée sur des règles et des cas pour poser à l'utilisateur des questions pertinentes, analyser sa situation juridique et lui fournir des informations juridiques appropriées ainsi que des cas antérieurs similaires liés à son problème juridique particulier. L'utilisateur peut utiliser ces informations pour négocier une solution mutuellement acceptable ou pour naviguer dans le processus juridique ardu. JusticeBot est donc un outil d'intelligence augmentée, qui améliore le niveau de connaissance de l'utilisateur pour l'aider à résoudre ses problèmes juridiques. Je décris la méthodologie globale et la manière dont je l'ai mise en œuvre dans des outils logiciels, par exemple le "JusticeCreator", une interface permettant de créer et de mettre à jour les outils JusticeBot. Je présente également un outil JusticeBot déployé dans le domaine des litiges entre propriétaires et locataires, qui est accessible au public à l'adresse https://justicebot.ca. Cet outil a été utilisé plus de 17 000 fois et 86 % des utilisateurs ayant répondu à une enquête ont déclaré qu'ils recommanderaient le système à d'autres personnes. Je pense que JusticeBot peut contribuer à aider les individus à résoudre leurs problèmes juridiques, ainsi qu'à renforcer la confiance et l'identification aux institutions juridiques au niveau sociétal en améliorant l'accès à la justice et l'accès à l'information juridique pour le citoyen moyen. / Artificial intelligence is one of the most thriving and exciting areas in research and industry. Recently, approaches using deep learning have led to a number of breakthroughs in a range of areas, including computer vision, machine translation, image recognition and generation, and text understanding and generation (such as GPT-4). In this thesis, I investigate if and how artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to improve access to justice and access to legal information for laypeople, i.e. people without legal training. The average citizen is often overwhelmed and helpless when dealing with legal problems. They may struggle to understand how the law applies to their situation, and further have trouble using the judicial system to resolve their issue, even if they are aware of their rights. This results in their problems going unresolved or prevents them from benefiting from opportunities available to them. For this reason, I developed and implemented the “JusticeBot” methodology, which uses AI to support laypeople with their legal issues. The resulting tools use a hybrid rule-based and case-based reasoning approach to ask a user relevant questions, analyze their legal situation, and provide them with suitable legal information and similar previous cases related to their particular legal problem. They can use this information to negotiate a mutually agreeable solution, or to navigate the arduous legal process. Thus, JusticeBot is an augmented intelligence tool, enhancing the user’s knowledge level to help them solve their legal problems. I describe the overall methodology and how I implemented it into software tools, e.g. the “JusticeCreator”, an interface to create and update JusticeBot tools. I also elaborate on a deployed JusticeBot tool in the area of landlord-tenant disputes, which is accessible to the public at https://justicebot.ca. This tool has been used over 17k times, and 86% of users responding to a survey report that they would recommend the system to others. I believe that JusticeBot can contribute to helping individuals resolve their legal problems, as well as increasing trust in and identification with legal institutions on a societal level, by improving access to justice and access to legal information for the average citizen.

Le contexte actuel de mondialisation et de mobilité des citoyens de tous les pays, qui parlent des langues diverses, change la composition culturelle et linguistique de la société québécoise. Cette diversification de la société remet en question la validité de certaines pratiques dans notre système judiciaire et, plus particulièrement, l’accessibilité à la justice pour tous les citoyens. La notion d’accès à la justice implique que tout justiciable possède le droit de participer en pleine égalité aux procédures qui se déroulent devant les tribunaux, ainsi que le droit à un procès équitable. La présente étude examine la pratique de l’un des plus importants tribunaux administratifs du Québec, le Tribunal administratif du travail (TAT), division santé et sécurité du travail. Le TAT offre aux travailleurs l’accès à la justice en pleine égalité, et dans le respect des règles de justice naturelle relativement aux demandes touchant leurs droits, mais sans fournir de services gratuits d’interprète aux travailleurs membres d’une minorité linguistique. Il s’agit des travailleurs qui ne parlent pas et ne comprennent pas la langue employée à l’audience, à savoir la langue française ou la langue anglaise. L’auteure examine le droit de ces travailleurs de bénéficier des services gratuits d’un interprète devant le TAT en raison du droit à l’égalité et du droit à un procès équitable garantis par les dispositions de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés et de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne. / The current context of globalization and mobility of citizens of all countries, who speak different languages, changes the cultural and linguistic composition of the Quebec society. This diversification of society challenges the validity of certain practices in our justice system, in particular the accessibility of justice for all citizens. The notion of access to justice implies that everyone has the right to participate fully in the proceedings before the courts, as well as the right to a fair trial. This study examines the practice of one of the largest administrative tribunals in Quebec, the Tribunal administratif du travail (TAT), Health and Safety Division. The TAT provides workers with equal access to justice, complying with the rules of natural justice with respect to claims affecting their rights, but without providing free interpreter services to minority language workers. These are workers who do not speak and do not understand the language used in a hearing, namely French or English. The author examines the right of these workers to free services of an interpreter before the TAT, pursuant to their right to equality and the right to a fair trial guaranteed by the provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.

In third-party litigation funding agreements, funders agree to finance a litigant’s litigation on condition that the funder will deduct a specified percentage from the capital awarded to the litigant in the event of success. In contingency fee agreements, such funding is provided by lawyers. Initially both these agreements were illegal in South Africa and England, but as civil courts became able to counter corruption and abuse – and with the recognition of the need to give more litigants access to justice – both were recognised as legal. Third-party litigation funding agreements by non-lawyers are unregulated in most jurisdictions. As the voluntary self-regulation in England is unsatisfactory, mandatory statutory regulation should be introduced in South Africa. The Contingency Fees Act 66 of 1997 caps the fee to 25% on the capital amount in South Africa. Since no such cap exists in Ontario (Canada), the cap of 25% in South Africa should be revised. / Eka Mintwanano yo nyika nseketelo wa mali eka nandzu wa thedi phati, vanyiki va mali va pfumela ku hakela mali ya nandzu wa mumangali hi xipimelo xa leswaku munyiki wa mali u ta susa phesenteji leyi kombisiweke ku suka eka mali leyi nyikiweke mumangali loko a humelela. Eka mintwanano ya tihakelo ta vukorhokeri, nseketelo walowo wa mali wu nyikiwa hi maloyara. Ekusunguleni mintwanano leyi hinkwayo a yi nga ri enawini eAfrika Dzonga na le England, kambe tanihi leswi tikhoto ta mfumo ti koteke ku kokela etlhelo eka timhaka ta vukungundzwana na nxaniso- na ku anakanyiwa ka xilaveko xo nyika vamangali votala mfikelelo wa vululami- hinkwayo yi anakanyiwile tanihi leyi nga enawini. Mintwanano yo nyika nseketelo wa mali eka nandzu wa thedi phati hi vanhu lava nga riki maloyara a yi lawuriwi eka vuavanyisi byotala. Tanihileswi vutilawuri byo tinyiketa eEngland byi nga riki kahle, mafambiselo ya nawu lama lavekaka ya fanele ya tivisiwa eAfrika Dzonga. Nawu wa Tihakelo ta Vukorhokeri wa 66 wa 1997 wu veka mpimo wa hakelo eka 25% eka xiphemu xa tsengo wa mali eAfrika Dzonga. Ku sukela loko ku ri hava mpimo lowu nga kona eOntario (Canada), mpimo wa 25% eAfrika Dzonga wu fanele wu langutisiwa hi vuntshwa. / Kha thendelano dza ndambedzo dza mbilo ine ya itelwa muthu, vhabadeli vho tenda u badela mbilo ya muthu o no khou itelwa mbilo tenda mubadeli a tshi ḓo ṱusa phesenthe yo tiwaho kha tshelede yo avhelwaho muthu ane a khou itelwa mbilo arali a kunda. Kha thendelano dza mbadelo dzine dza badelwa musi ramilayo o no kunda kha mulandu, mbadelo idzo dzi ṋetshedzwa nga vhoramilayo. Mathomoni thendelano idzi vhuvhili hadzo dzo vha dzi siho mulayoni Afurika Tshipembe na England, fhedzi musi khothe dza mbilo dzi tshi vho thoma u hanedzana na tshanḓanguvhoni na u tambudzwa - na u dzhiela nṱha ṱhoḓea ya u ṋea vhathu vhane vha khou itelwa mbilo u swikelela vhulamukanyi –vhuvhili hadzo dzo dzhiwa sa dzi re mulayoni. Thendelano dza ndambedzo dza mbilo ine muthu a itelwa nga vhathu vhane vha sa vhe vhoramilayo a i langulwi kha vhulamukanyi vhunzhi. Samusi u langulwa ha ndaulo nga iwe muṋe hu ha u tou funa ngei England a zwi ṱanganedzwi, ndaulo ya khombekhombe ya mulayo i fanela u ḓivhadzwa Afurika Tshipembe. Mulayo wa Mbadelo dzine dza badelwa Ramilayo musi o kunda wa nomboro 66 wa 1997 mutengo wawo u guma kha 25% mutengo wa tshelede Afurika Tshipembe. Samusi tshikalo itsho tshi sa wanali ngei Ontario (Canada), tshikalo itsho tsha 25% Afurika Tshipembe tshi fanela u sedzuluswa hafhu. / Private Law / LL. M.

Submitted by Marcia Bacha (marcia.bacha@fgv.br) on 2012-05-14T12:37:02Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Mauro Brant Heringer.pdf: 3231910 bytes, checksum: 718d078a383b39a3a6c91c90c589aafb (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Marcia Bacha (marcia.bacha@fgv.br) on 2012-05-14T12:37:15Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Mauro Brant Heringer.pdf: 3231910 bytes, checksum: 718d078a383b39a3a6c91c90c589aafb (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2012-05-14T12:37:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mauro Brant Heringer.pdf: 3231910 bytes, checksum: 718d078a383b39a3a6c91c90c589aafb (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012 / Por mais que a informatização esteja avançada (interligação por meio da rede internet de computadores entre os órgãos e entidades públicas pelo Estado), máquina alguma substituirá os dramas do homem contemporâneo, principalmente aqueles que sempre estiveram alijados da cidadania. O presente estudo traz à baila as reflexões e discussões acadêmicas desenvolvidas ao longo das mais de 700 horas/aulas do curso de mestrado em Poder Judiciário, turma 2010. Longe de ser uma unanimidade o Poder Judiciário é um poder do Estado que representa antes de tudo a capacidade e a prerrogativa de julgar, de acordo com as regras constitucionais e das leis criadas pelo Poder Legislativo em determinado país. É um dos mais sólidos pilares nas democracias e um perigoso algoz nos regimes absolutos. Apesar desta importância e de no Brasil ser um poder sólido que já demonstrou sua importância para a garantia da solidificação da democracia, são poucos os estudos sobre o Judiciário, poucos e iniciais são as pesquisas sérias sobre este poder de suma importância para a sociedade, para economia e para as instituições. Como, também, não é espanto quando vemos que fato repetitivo que a maior insatisfação ou reclamação da sociedade reside na morosidade das soluções judiciais traduzida pela alta taxa de litigiosidade da justiça brasileira. O Poder Judiciário é objeto de estudos sistemáticos, contínuos e avançados em diversos países que já demonstraram a importância de se conhecer bem as suas propostas, os resultados das suas atividades, funções e os seus gastos, pois, o seu 'negócio'é a resolução dos conflitos da sociedade de forma a contribuir com a pacificação da mesma através de uma ordem jurídica justa. Os estudos realizados nos Estados Unidos, Alemanha e Espanha, como exemplo, demonstram que conhecer bem o judiciário é o primeiro passo para melhor gerenciá-lo. Assim, deve-se menção e reconhecimento no investimento realizado pela Fundação Getúlio Vargas em promover com destaque o presente Mestrado em Poder Judiciário. A FGV é uma das poucas instituições privadas que tem como um dos seus objetivos o preparo pessoal, extrapolando as fronteiras do ensino com avanços significativos nas áreas da pesquisa e da informação. No mesmo caminho da qualificação profissional de seus magistrados e servidores e na vanguarda da gestão judiciária, o Tribunal de Justiça do Distrito Federal e dos Territórios, investiu e acreditou na proposta de estudos e pesquisas do presente mestrado, merecendo, significativamente, os elogios e agradecimentos pela visão de futuro e investimento realizado no conhecimento que é sempre importante e necessário. A dissertação em comento representa primeiramente uma visão contraposta ao modelo de política pública encampada pelo Conselho Nacional de Justiça, através da Resolução 125 de 29 de novembro de 2010, cujo objeto é o tratamento adequado dos conflitos de interesse no âmbito do Poder Judiciário, representando, assim, interesse especial de pesquisa científica por se tratar de uma política nacional judiciária a ser adotada, obrigatoriamente, por todos os Tribunais de Justiça do país. Além deste aspecto supra referido, reside, também, o fato do ineditismo deste estudo e pesquisa, especificamente, porque essa política pública judiciária aborda aspectos e variáveis novas no tratamento das atividades e das funções próprias do Poder Judiciário quando propõem, como exemplo, o tratamento dos conflitos considerados pré processuais. Outro aspecto importante merecedor de atenção no estudo reflete-se na discussão do modelo de política pública que, em premissa vênia, deveria ser tratado em caráter geral republicando do Estado e não particularizado em um dos seus entes, mesmo que pareça ser, constitucionalmente, pressuposto da alçada do Poder Judiciário tratar exclusivamente do problema da altíssima litigiosidade e do baixo resultado de resposta à demanda posta para seu controle. Este estudo, tem como objetivo demonstrar que a resolução 125/2010 do CNJ é insuficiente para resolver os problemas de congestionamento e morosidade da Justiça brasileira, como preconizada, isso porque, o modelo que se propõe para combater o problema da morosidade é restrito e está 'contaminado' pela idéia do monopólio da jurisdição ou por uma espécie similar que traz para o âmbito do judiciário uma nova atividade de trabalho, a qual é relacionada com a solução do conflito pré-processual a qual deveria fazer parte de uma política pública geral não restrita a um poder republicano. A correspondência dos argumentos com a materialização utilizada para o problema será comprovada nas linhas que se seguem, pois, assuntos com grande abrangência como as soluções judiciais devem, preferencialmente, adotar mecanismos públicos de caráter geral para uma boa solução. Nesse sentido, o trabalho demonstrará que as tentativas recorrentes em superar o problema da alta demanda judicial está restrita a modelos insuficientes abrangidos por um monopólio que não deveria ser aplicado para solucionar problemas pré processuais no âmbito do Poder Judiciário. Constitui, pois, um contraponto à idéia de efetividade na redução da demanda judicial tradicional 1 como prevista pela política pública judiciária frente ao monopólio da jurisdição, ou seja, frente à reserva que detém o Judiciário na promoção e gestão de uma nova atividade – o tratamento dos conflitos de interesse pré-processual por meio dos instrumentos de autocomposição, notadamente as conciliações e mediações. Apresentam-se, igualmente, neste trabalho proposições legislativas que dão o suporte material às idéias apresentadas, caracterizando a comprovação de viabilidade entre a apresentação do problema científico, as justificativas para o enfrentamento do problema e uma solução para o mesmo, como vista a modernizar uma política pública. Importante reafirmar que o escopo do presente trabalho não reside na observação própria dos modelos e técnicas de resolução de conflitos, notadamente as conciliações e mediações, incentivadas pelo CNJ, ou nos modelos arbitragem. Ao contrário, espera-se que todas as tentativas que possam melhorar e modernizar os atuais serviços judiciais no Brasil sejam válidas, eficazes e são muito bem vindas, pois, é uma tentativa positiva para melhorar o atual cenário em que se encontra o Poder Judiciário quando é confrontado em seu acesso à justiça, rapidez, confiabilidade e segurança nos seus julgamentos. / As much as technology is growing (connecting computers through the internet among agencies and public entities by the state), any machine will replace the drama of contemporary man, especially those who've been priced out of citizenship. Man's problems can not be solved by machines in distant locations without allowing direct access to the human who controls the machine. This study brings up the reflections and academic discussions developed over the more than 700 hours / lessons of the masters course in the Judiciary, class 2010. Far from being a unanimous decision, the Judiciary is a state power that represents above all the ability and prerogative to judge, according to the rules and the constitutional laws created by the Legislature in a determinate country. It is one of the strongest pillars in democracies and dangerous regimes in the absolute nemesis. Despite this importance and the fact that in Brazil is a solid that has demonstrated its importance in ensuring the solidification of democracy, there are few studies on the Judiciary, and initials are few serious researches on this power of paramount importance to society, to economy and institutions. When we see that the most repetitive dissatisfaction or complaint society lives in the slowness of judicial solutions translated by the high rate of litigation in Brazilian courts. The Judiciary is the object of systematic studies, continuous and advanced in several countries have already demonstrated the importance of knowing well its proposals, the results of its activities, functions, and their costs, because their 'business' is the resolution the conflicts of society to contribute to the pacification of the same through a fair legal system. Studies in the United States, Germany and Spain, for example, show that the Judiciary is familiar with the first step to better manage it. Thus, we have to mention the investment made by the Fundação Getúlio Vargas to promote especially the present Master of the Judiciary. FGV is one of the few private institutions that have as one of its goals the personal preparation, beyond the boundaries of teaching with significant advances in the areas of research and information. In the same way of the professional qualification of judges and their servers and at the forefront of judicial management, the Court of Federal District and Territories, invested and believed in the proposed study and research of this master, deserving significantly, the praise and thanks for vision and investment in the knowledge that it is always important and necessary. The dissertation represents at first a vision against the model of public policy championed by the National Judicial Council, through Resolution 125 of November 29, 2010, whose object is the appropriate treatment of conflicts of interest within the Judiciary, representing this way a special scientific interest because it is a national judicial policy to be adopted, must, by all the courts of justice in the country. Apart from that mentioned above, lives also the fact that the novelty of this study and research, specifically because this public policy deals aspects and new variables in the treatment of the activities and functions of the Judiciary when they propose, as an example, the treatment of the conflicts. Another important aspect that worth the attention in the study is reflected in the discussion of public policy model, that should be treated in general republishing from the state and not particularized, even if it seems constitutionally of the Judiciary to treat exclusively with the problem of high litigation and low answer to the demand in its control. This study has a goal to demonstrate that the resolution 125/2010 CNJ is insufficient to solve the problems of congestion and delay in the Brazilian courts, as recommended, because, the model proposed to combat the problem of delays is restricted and is 'contaminated' by the idea of the monopoly of jurisdiction or a similar kind that brings justice to the scope of a new work activity, which is related to the solution of the conflict pre-trial which should be part of a general public policy does not restricted to a Republican power. Correspondence with the materialization of the arguments used for the problem will be proven in the lines that follow, therefore, with great coverage issues such as judicial remedies should preferably adopt mechanisms for general public a good solution. In this sense, the work will demonstrate that the recurrent attempts to overcome the problem of high lawsuit is restricted to insufficient models covered by a monopoly that should not be applied to solve procedural problems in the pre Judiciary. It is therefore a counterpoint to the idea of effectiveness in reducing the traditional lawsuit as provided for by the judicial against the monopoly of jurisdiction, ie, the reserve forward who holds the judiciary in promoting and managing of a new activity - the treatment of conflicts of interest pre-trial through instruments, notably the conciliation and mediation. We present also, in this study, legislative proposals that give material support to the presented ideas, characterizing the evidence of the viability between the presentation of scientific problem, the reasons for the confronting of the problem and a solution for it, how to modernize a public policy. Important to reaffirm that the scope of this present work is not based on the observation of the models and techniques of conflict resolution, notably the conciliation and mediation, encouraged by the CNJ, models or arbitration. Rather, it is expected that all attempts to improve and modernize the current legal services in Brazil are valid, effective and very welcome, because it is a positive attempt to improve the current scenario is the Judiciary when is confronted in their access to justice, speed, reliability and security of your judgments.