• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 2
  • Tagged with
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

O controle de constitucionalidade difuso da súmula vinculante como instrumento hábil a garantir o direito fundamental de acesso à justiça

Debortoli, Karina 23 March 2018 (has links)
Submitted by Sandra Azevedo (sandracristina@fdv.br) on 2018-08-22T19:34:26Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Karina Debortoli.pdf: 1407699 bytes, checksum: edd33770c89e17a4fdf0055ce42d1876 (MD5) / Rejected by Ana Paula Galdino (repositorio@fdv.br), reason: Inserir a referência da dissertação no campo "citação". on 2018-08-24T13:14:11Z (GMT) / Submitted by Sandra Azevedo (sandracristina@fdv.br) on 2018-08-27T17:15:41Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Karina Debortoli.pdf: 1407699 bytes, checksum: edd33770c89e17a4fdf0055ce42d1876 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Ana Paula Galdino (repositorio@fdv.br) on 2018-08-29T13:00:33Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Karina Debortoli.pdf: 1407699 bytes, checksum: edd33770c89e17a4fdf0055ce42d1876 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-29T13:00:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Karina Debortoli.pdf: 1407699 bytes, checksum: edd33770c89e17a4fdf0055ce42d1876 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-03-23 / O presente estudo tem como tema a análise da possibilidade de controle difuso de constitucionalidade da súmula vinculante como mecanismo hábil a garantir o direito fundamental de acesso à justiça. Como metodologia utiliza-se o dedutivo e como técnica de pesquisa emprega-se a bibliográfica, a qual se mostrou a mais adequada, eis que possibilita a análise de vasto material doutrinário sobre o tema. O desenvolvimento teórico do estudo tem como base o referencial da jurisdição constitucional desenvolvida por Hans Kelsen bem como sua teoria sobre o escalonamento das normas e a necessidade de observância da norma fundamental no momento de elaboração das normas infraconstitucionais, utilizando-se o controle de constitucionalidade. Essas ideias, aliadas aos conceitos de direito fundamental de acesso à justiça e de ato normativo, além do estudo do instituto da súmula vinculante, possibilitam, ao final, a compreensão da natureza de ato normativo da súmula vinculante e, consequentemente, a sua submissão ao controle difuso de constitucionalidade como forma de assegurar o acesso à justiça. / The topic of this paper is the analysis of the possibility of having the decentralized or diffuse control of constitutionality of the binding precedent as an effective mechanism to safeguard the fundamental right of access to justice. The deduction reasoning was used as the methodology and the bibliographic review, as the research technique, which proved to be the most adequate, for it enables analysis of vast doctrinal material on the topic. The theoretical development of the study is based on the reference of the constitutional jurisdiction developed by Hans Kelsen as well as his theory on the legal pyramid and the need of observing the fundamental act at the moment of creation of infra-constitutional acts, using the constitutionality control. Such ideas, together with the concepts of the fundamental right of access to justice and of normative act, along with the study of the formation of the binding precedent, make it possible in the end to understand the nature of the normative act of the binding precedent and subsequently, its submission to the diffuse control of constitutionality as a way to safeguard access to justice.
2

Repercuss?o geral e s?mula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso

Rocha, Val?ria Maria Lacerda 11 March 2011 (has links)
Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T14:27:16Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf: 729931 bytes, checksum: 0e394caf067ef7b86575e19d833c0a17 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-03-11 / Brazil since its first republican constitution has adopted systems of laws control. The review activity was given to three state powers or functions state, Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. However, it appears that in the country along the constitutional history, has stood considerably the jurisdictional control of the most important control. Initially, back in 1891, Brazil adopted the jurisdictional control of diffuse from U.S, whose role in monitoring of standards is delivered to all organs of the judiciary, which may face a case, put on trial, ascertain whether or not the possibility of applying a law, removing its impact in case of unconstitutionality. In 1969, entered in the second legal model of judicial review, the concentrated control of constitutionality, whose inspiration comes from the positivist theory of Hans Kelsen, and was adopted by the Austrian Constitution of 1920. According to the abstract control the supervision of law is given to a Court or Constitutional Court, responsible for the analysis of the legal constitutionality independent of its application to a specific case. In Brazil the role of concentrated control was handed over exclusively to the Supreme Court, which serves as the Constitutional Court, which accumulates that function with other constitutionally provided jurisdiction. Throughout this period, from 1891 until today, Brazil has maintained a dual system of judicial control of legal constitutionality, where they coexist and harmonize the diffuse control exercised by any organ of the Judiciary, and concentrated control of competence the Supreme Court. However, one must recognize that with the advent of the Federal Constitution of 1988, the concentrated control has emerged on the national stage due to two important factors: the expansion of the legal capacity to sue and the inclusion of other ways control, besides the already known Direct Claim of Unconstitutionality. This concentrated control and projection of the Supreme Court s attempt to become a true constitutional court, led to a relative weakening of diffuse control even when performed by the Brazilian Constitutional Court. In order to become a true constitutional court, all decisions handed down by the Supreme in the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction should have the same weight and the same measure, or at least bring improvement to similar effects, once is the responsible for the final word when it comes to constitutional interpretation. Thus, the writs of certiorari and stare decisis were responsible for profound changes in the diffuse control, allowing the Supreme Court can strengthen its decisions even in the diffuse control. These two institutions have substantially changed the legal status of diffuse control, allowing an extension of the effects of decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, so that you can no longer be said that the effects of this control to restrict the disputing parties in the process / O Brasil desde a sua primeira constitui??o republicana tem adotado sistemas de controle de constitucionalidade das normas. Verifica-se que esta tarefa de fiscaliza??o normativa foi entregue aos tr?s poderes ou fun??es estatais, Executivo, Legislativo e Judici?rio. Entretanto, verifica-se que no pa?s, ao longo da hist?ria constitucional, tem se destacado consideravelmente o controle jurisdicional de constitucionalidade das leis. Inicialmente, j? em 1891, foi adotado o controle jurisdicional difuso ou concreto, de origem norte-americana, cuja fun??o de fiscaliza??o das normas foi entregue a todos os ?rg?os do Poder Judici?rio, os quais poder?o diante de um caso concreto, posto a julgamento, verificarem ou n?o a possibilidade de aplica??o de uma norma, afastando sua incid?ncia em caso de inconstitucionalidade. Em 1969, entrou definitivamente no ordenamento jur?dico o segundo modelo de fiscaliza??o jurisdicional, o controle de constitucionalidade concentrado ou abstrato, cuja inspira??o adv?m da teoria positivista de Hans Kelsen, e foi adotado pela Constitui??o Austr?aca de 1920. Segundo o controle abstrato a fiscaliza??o ? entregue a um Tribunal ou Corte Constitucional respons?vel pela an?lise da norma em tese, independente de sua aplica??o a um caso espec?fico. No Brasil a fun??o do controle concentrado foi entregue com exclusividade ao Supremo Tribunal Federal, que exerce a fun??o de Tribunal Constitucional, que acumula referida fun??o com outras compet?ncias jurisdicionais constitucionalmente previstas. Durante todo esse per?odo, de 1891 at? os dias atuais, o Brasil tem mantido um sistema misto de controle jurisdicional de constitucionalidade das normas, onde convivem e se harmonizam o controle difuso, exercido por qualquer ?rg?o do Poder Judici?rio, e o controle concentrado, de compet?ncia do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Por?m, for?oso ? reconhecer, que com o advento da carta de 1988, o controle concentrado ganhou proje??o e destaque no cen?rio nacional, por dois importantes fatores: a amplia??o do rol de legitimados ativos e a inclus?o de outros mecanismos de controle, al?m da j? conhecida A??o Direta de Inconstitucionalidade. Esta proje??o do controle concentrado e a tentativa do Supremo Tribunal de se tornar uma verdadeira corte constitucional, levaram a um relativo enfraquecimento do controle difuso mesmo quando realizado pelo Tribunal Constitucional brasileiro. Ocorre que para se tornar uma verdadeira corte constitucional, todas as decis?es prolatadas pelo Supremo no exerc?cio da jurisdi??o constitucional devem ter o mesmo peso e a mesma medida, ou pelo menos surtirem efeitos an?logos, haja vista ser o respons?vel pela ?ltima palavra em se tratando de interpreta??o constitucional. Desta forma, a repercuss?o geral e a s?mula vinculante foram respons?veis por profundas transforma??es no controle difuso, permitindo que o Supremo Tribunal Federal possa fortalecer suas decis?es mesmo em sede de controle concreto. Estes dois institutos modificaram substancialmente a natureza jur?dica do controle difuso, permitindo um alargamento dos efeitos das decis?es prolatadas pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, de modo que j? n?o se poder? mais afirmar que os efeitos deste controle se restrinjam as partes litigantes do processo

Page generated in 0.1512 seconds