Submitted by Sara Ribeiro (sara.ribeiro@ucb.br) on 2017-06-05T16:23:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 MarcioGoncalvesMoreiraDissertacaoParcial2015.pdf: 735161 bytes, checksum: 7c6a3ef9512905bac142252525fc0aa6 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Sara Ribeiro (sara.ribeiro@ucb.br) on 2017-06-05T16:23:55Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 MarcioGoncalvesMoreiraDissertacaoParcial2015.pdf: 735161 bytes, checksum: 7c6a3ef9512905bac142252525fc0aa6 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-05T16:23:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 MarcioGoncalvesMoreiraDissertacaoParcial2015.pdf: 735161 bytes, checksum: 7c6a3ef9512905bac142252525fc0aa6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-11-07 / In a Lawful Democratic State the law should be in line with the Federal Constitution, as even the legislature owes allegiance to it. Possible legal instrument that affronts to the Constitution must be removed from the legal system. The infra-constitutional legislation should only be applied if it passes through the filter of the Constitution. The Judicial Law Review can only have a normative instrument object edited under the aegis of the Constitution parameter to control. So for pre-constitutional rules are the theories of reception and revocation, which are used to solve the problem of the law that deals with the judgment assurance requirement to oppose a legal resource for tax foreclosure, since Law No. 6830 / 80 was issued under the aegis of the Federal Constitution repealed by the present Constitutional Book. The new constitutional order as a fundamental right guaranteed broad access to justice, that is, unrestricted, so to require the deposit of certain amount of money to discuss tax enforcement is manifestly against the Constitution because it constitutes obstacle to free access to the judiciary. Including even at the administrative level does not admit anymore the deposit as a condition of admissibility of appeals. / No Estado Democr??tico de Direito as normas devem estar em conson??ncia com a Constitui????o Federal, j?? que at?? mesmo o legislador a ela deve obedi??ncia. Eventual instrumento normativo que afronta a Constitui????o Federal deve ser afastado do ordenamento jur??dico. A legisla????o infraconstitucional somente deve ser aplicada se passar pelo filtro da Constitui????o. O controle de constitucionalidade somente pode ter por objeto instrumento normativo editado sob a ??gide da Constitui????o par??metro para o controle. Ent??o, para as normas pr??-constitucionais existem as teorias da recep????o e revoga????o, as quais s??o utilizadas para resolver o problema da norma que trata da exig??ncia de garantia do ju??zo para opor embargos ?? execu????o fiscal, uma vez que a Lei n.?? 6830/80 foi editada sob a ??gide de Constitui????o Federal revogada pela atual Carta Constitucional. A nova ordem constitucional garantiu como direito fundamental o amplo acesso ao judici??rio, ou seja, irrestrito, de modo que exigir da parte o dep??sito de determinado valor para discutir a execu????o fiscal ?? manifestamente contra a Constitui????o por constituir ??bice ao livre acesso ao judici??rio. Inclusive at?? mesmo na esfera administrativa n??o se admite mais o dep??sito como condi????o de admissibilidade dos recursos.