O estudo analisa, à luz do direito positivo em vigor no Brasil, a possibilidade de emissão de sentenças parciais dentro de um mesmo processo, de modo a solucionar por etapas o objeto litigioso. Procura-se demonstrar que não se trata de novidade absoluta, já convivendo o sistema brasileiro de longa data com situações de fracionamento da resposta judiciária, possibilidade que ficou amplificada com as sucessivas alterações por que passou o Código de Processo Civil Brasileiro. Examinam-se e refutam-se os afirmados obstáculos que impediriam ou contraindicariam o uso da técnica, com a demonstração de ser ela, em verdade, uma imposição do modelo processual constitucional brasileiro. Examinam-se aspectos técnicos ligados ao uso da técnica, verificando-se, principalmente: (i) em quais modalidades de cumulação de pedidos e de sujeitos ela tem cabimento; (ii) se também é possível falar na apreciação por etapas dos diferentes fundamentos da ação e da defesa; (iii) se a emissão de sentença parcial é ato discricionário ou vinculado do juiz; (iv) qual o momento adequado para que o juiz delibere acerca do custo financeiro do processo; (v) se é possível a formação gradual da coisa julgada dentro de um mesmo processo. Por fim, procura-se harmonizar o sistema de recursos ao uso da técnica, fazendo-se rápida menção aos sistemas jurídicos de outros países e ao Projeto do Novo Código de Processo Civil, que contempla o instituto aqui tratado na figura do Julgamento Antecipado Parcial do Mérito. / In the light of positive law in force in Brazil, this study analyses the possibility of partial judgements being given in relation to the same lawsuit, in order to settle litigation in stages. The study seeks to demonstrate that this is not an absolute novelty and that the Brazilian legal system has been accustomed for a long time to situations in which the judicial response is fragmented. This possibility has increased following the successive alterations undergone by the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure. The obstacles alleged to prevent or counterindicate the use of this technique are examined and refuted, demonstrating that in truth the technique is an imposition of the Brazilian constitutional procedural model. An examination is made of the technical aspects related to the use of the technique, verifying in particular: (i) in which modes of joinder of claims and subjects it is admissible; (ii) if it is also possible for the different grounds for the suit and the defence to be examined in stages; (iii) if the giving of partial judgement is a discretionary or binding act of the judge; (iv) what is the appropriate moment for the judge to decide on the financial cost of the proceedings; (v) if it is possible for res judicata to be gradually formed within the same lawsuit. Finally an attempt is made to harmonize the appeal system with the use of the technique, referring rapidly to the legal systems of other countries and the Bill of Law for the New Code of Civil Procedure, which contemplates the institution dealt with here as Partial Summary Judgement of Merit.

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:17:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_flavio_roberto.pdf: 1468065 bytes, checksum: b0048ff6c11160b30e97a0846286e1ff (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-10-21 / This essay has the objective to appraise, analyze and to interpret what is unconstitutional resiudicata, and in the practical application of jurisprudence of national courts in public law. The Institution of the res iudicata is treated in the Brazilian Law by the Constitutional Text, by the Brazilian Civil Process Code, besides the Law of the Introduction to the Brazilian Civil Code and sparse legislation. Due to the multiplicity of Law subjects taking care of the Institution, for one part of the doctrine, it would not have constitutional protection and it could be modified and even abolished under infraconstitutional norms. Under that premise, it was built the doctrine known as relativism of the judged thing , that links the effects of the resiudicata thing to its normative fundament of validity or the justice of decisum. Once the chosen subject has its very own characteristics of almost exclusive development in the national doctrine it was privileged the doctrine exam and national jurisprudence, not failing to remember, nevertheless, the contributions of the foreign doctrine, when, effectively, they could support the analyzes of the approached issues in this Essay. The text presents the origins of the res iudicata and classifies the essential process elements for the understanding of the Institution as a process-juridical category. It examines the principle of juridical reliability, its historical evolution and its interpretation in the current law, as well as, the nature of the judged thing as a normative category, to the Institution position in the Brazilian Constitutional text. It also mentions, the juridical nature of the formed sentences in rejoinder to the present Federal Constitution and the effects of the doctrinaire positioning that states the no existence of the unconstitutional res iudicata. Yet, it proceeds, to the study of the new writing of the articles 475-L § 1st and 741, single clause, of the Brazilian Process Civil Code, consolidated by the Law number 11.232/2005, that partially accepted, the above indicated theory. At last, it dedicates considerations on representative judicial decisions of practical difficulties that the application of the Institution has had in the brazilian jurisprudence / Esta Dissertação tem por objetivo conceituar, analisar e interpretar a chamada coisa julgada inconstitucional no campo doutrinário, no seu tratamento normativo e na aplicação prática da jurisprudência dos tribunais nacionais, no âmbito do direito público. O Instituto da coisa julgada é tratado no direito brasileiro pelo Texto Constitucional, pelo Código de Processo Civil Brasileiro e pela Lei de Introdução ao Código Civil Brasileiro, além de legislação esparsa. Ante a multiplicidade de esferas normativas cuidando do Instituto, para uma parte da doutrina, ele não teria proteção constitucional e poderia ser modificado e até abolido por normas infraconstitucionais. Por tal premissa, foi construída doutrina conhecida como relativização da coisa julgada , que vincula os efeitos da coisa julgada ao seu fundamento normativo de validade ou à justiça do decisum. Face as características muito próprias do tema escolhido, - de desenvolvimento quase que exclusivo na doutrina nacional -, privilegiou-se o exame da doutrina e jurisprudência nacionais, sem olvidar, no entanto, as contribuições da doutrina estrangeira, quando, efetivamente, puderam auxiliar na análise das questões abordadas nesta Dissertação. O texto apresenta as origens da coisa julgada e conceitua os elementos processuais essenciais para a compreensão do Instituto como categoria jurídico-processual. Examina o princípio da segurança jurídica, sua evolução histórica e sua interpretação no direito atual, bem como a natureza da coisa julgada como categoria normativa, face a posição que o Instituto ocupa no texto constitucional brasileiro. Aborda, também, a natureza jurídica das sentenças formadas em contrariedade à Constituição Federal vigente e os efeitos do posicionamento doutrinário que apregoa a inexistência da coisa julgada inconstitucional. Procede, ainda, ao estudo da nova redação dos arts. 475-L § 1º e 741, parágrafo único, do Código de Processo Civil brasileiro, cristalizada pela Lei nº 11.232/2005, que acolheu, ao menos em parte, a teoria acima indicada. Por fim, dedica considerações sobre decisões judiciais representativas das dificuldades práticas que a aplicação do Instituto tem gerado na jurisprudência brasileira

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:18:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_romero.pdf: 1647478 bytes, checksum: 07145d24fb8e9851fe1bd57d62340d9f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-03-11 / This study seeks to discuss the relativization of res judicata in actions of investigation of paternity. It deals with the exceptional hypothesis in which the objective the deconstitution of a sentence wich become already finished, with a deadline for bringing the rescission has passed, due to the advent of a new evidence, the DNA exame, which can demonstrate that the sentence undercover the mantle of res judicata may be flawed. The lawyers, facing this situation, often joining with an autonomous action aimed at reform of the decision, because there is no other remedy applicable, for the duration of action for rescission have been exhausted. In these legal actions often requires the examination of DNA, now joins the other application the report of the examination, because it has already been done (and demonstrates that the sentence, covered up the mantle of res judicata, is wrong) .Given this situation, extraordinary and unusual, there was a great concern in doctrine, but also in the courts, because what is the best solution: to relativize the res judicata or keep it? In answering this question the lawyers always end up saying the conflict between security and justice. The relativistic point that justice must prevail, since the non-relativistic point that should place the principle of legal certainty. The study includes some innovative features, such as the detailed study of all cases decided by the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), which is made a detailed percentage of cases that were for and against the theory of relaxation of res judicata, which enables understanding of how they developed the theory of relativity of res judicata before the Supreme Court. Another innovation is the attempt to show the conflict between security and justice on another aspect, something already done by other scholars, in works on other subjects (such as the legal philosophy), but not done yet in the case of relativization of res judicata in actions of paternity / O presente trabalho visa discutir sobre a relativização da coisa julgada, nas ações de investigação de paternidade. Trata de hipótese excepcional na qual se objetiva a desconstituição de uma sentença já transitada em julgado, com prazo para interposição da rescisória transcorrido, em virtude do advento de um novo meio de prova, o exame de DNA, o qual pode demonstrar que a sentença acobertada pelo manto da coisa julgada material pode estar equivocada. Os advogados, diante de tal situação, costumam ingressar com uma ação autônoma objetivando a reforma da decisão, porque não há outro remédio aplicável, pois o prazo da ação rescisória já foi esgotado. Em aludidas ações muitas vezes se requer a realização do exame de DNA, em outras já se junta à petição inicial o laudo do exame, pois o mesmo já foi realizado (e demonstra que a sentença, acobertada pelo manto da coisa julgada, está equivocada). Diante desta situação, extraordinária e atípica, surgiu uma grande inquietação na doutrina, como também nos Tribunais, pois qual será a melhor solução: relativizar a coisa julgada ou mantê-la? Ao responder esta indagação os juristas acabam sempre alegando o conflito existente entre segurança e justiça. Os relativistas apontam que a justiça deve prevalecer, já os nãorelativistas apontam que deve prevalecer o princípio da segurança jurídica. O presente estudo traz alguns aspectos inovadores, como o estudo detalhado de todos os casos decididos pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça (STJ), onde é feito um detalhamento percentual dos casos que foram favoráveis e contrários à teoria da flexibilização da coisa julgada, o que possibilita o entendimento de como se desenvolveu a teoria da relativização da coisa julgada perante o STJ. Outra inovação é a tentativa de mostrar o conflito entre segurança e justiça sobre outro aspecto, algo já realizado por outros doutrinadores, em obras sobre outras matérias (a exemplo da filosofia jurídica), mas não realizado ainda em se tratando de relativização da coisa julgada nas ações de investigação de paternidade

Submitted by Biblioteca Central (biblioteca@unicap.br) on 2017-10-10T18:31:45Z No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_jose_tenorio.pdf: 800800 bytes, checksum: 1c0e5c39b1c03bb05f76ae3501b4c6a9 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-10-10T18:31:45Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_jose_tenorio.pdf: 800800 bytes, checksum: 1c0e5c39b1c03bb05f76ae3501b4c6a9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-06-15 / The present work analyzes the Influence of the Supervenient Facts into the Progress Process, in face of the article 462 of the Brazilian Civil Process Code. The study begins, with emphasis in the juridical institute of the Lawsuit´s stabilization present at the two legal statutes and their devices, with the analysis of the comparative aspects between the Canonic Procedural Law and the Civil Procedural Law. It talks about the juridical institute of the demand´s cause, their theories that objective to define and put it and locate on which theory our CPC adopted it and, finally, analyzes the influence of these facts in face of article 462 of the CPC, its influence in face of the judged thing, the Open legal System, the Emergency in the Procedural System, the legal security, the relativização of the considered thing and the Modulation of the decisions of the Supreme Federal Court. The research method was based on the reading of the bibliography about the juridical institutes which have relation with the project´s theme, based on the jurisprudence of the National and Greater Tribunals, on the brazilian and foreign doctrine, and based on an concret case´s precedent. The results of the study made a better comprehension of the project, with an precedent´s indication, and it contributived to the objective´s execution, specially to the judgements of the Local Tribunals, of the Justice Superior Tribunal and of the Federal Superior Tribunal, with the modulation of their respective decisions. / Trata o trabalho de analisar a Influência dos fatos supervenientes ao processo em andamento, em face do artigo 462 do Código de Processo Civil. O estudo parte, com ênfase no instituto jurídico da Estabilização da demanda nos dois diplomas legais e seus respectivos dispositivos, da analise dos aspectos comparativos entre o Direito Processual Canônico e o Direito Processual Civil. Discorre sobre o instituto jurídico da causa de pedir, suas teorias que procuram defini-la e posiciona-se sobre qual teoria o nosso CPC a adotou e, por fim, analisa a influência desses fatos em face do artigo 462 do CPC, sua influência em face da coisa julgada, o Sistema jurídico Aberto, a Emergência no Sistema Processual, a segurança jurídica, a relativização da coisa julgada e a Modulação das decisões do Supremo Tribunal Federal. O método de pesquisa tomou por base a leitura do repertório bibliográfico sobre os institutos jurídicos que se relacionam com tema do projeto, com aporte na jurisprudência dos Tribunais Nacionais e Superiores, em doutrina, nacional e estrangeira, bem como abordado precedente de um caso concreto. Os resultados do estudo fizeram com que melhor esclarecesse o entendimento do projeto, com indicação de precedente, e contribuísse para o cumprimento do seu objetivo, especialmente aos julgados de Tribunais Locais, do Superior Tribunal de Justiça e do Supremo Tribunal Federal, com a modulação de suas respectivas decisões.

L’autorité de la chose jugée, expression de l’exigence de stabilité des décisions juridictionnelles et de la capacité de l’Etat souverain à exercer son pouvoir juridictionnel en tranchant définitivement l’affaire lui étant soumise, est fortement liée à l’enchainement processuel dont elle constitue l’aboutissement naturel. Ces dernières années, en raison de l’influence du droit supranational, la chose jugée subit également un processus d’érosion de son caractère irréfragable. En particulier, alors que le conflit entre chose jugée et décisions de la Cour de justice de l’UE apparait comme « pathologique », les spécificités du système conventionnel de protection des droits de l’homme provoquent un conflit quasi « physiologique » avec la chose jugée de droit interne. La nature particulière de ce dernier type de conflit s’explique non seulement en raison du principe de subsidiarité et de l’épuisement des voies de recours internes qui caractérisent la saisine de la Cour EDH, mais aussi du fait de la nécessité d’une « restitution in integrum » du requérant victime d’une violation conventionnelle qui impose une obligation de réouverture de la procédure interne, en exécution de l’article 46 Conv. EDH. La thèse analyse, sous l’angle comparé du droit italien et français, les notions qui sous-tendent ce conflit, à savoir la valeur de la res iudicata et l’incidence des systèmes européens de protection des droits fondamentaux sur l’ordre processuel interne pour ensuite se pencher sur les modalités concrètes par lesquelles les deux ordres juridiques ont permis le dépassement de l’autorité de la chose jugée pour garantir l’exécution des arrêts de la Cour EDH. Dans le cadre ainsi tracé, la récente entrée en vigueur du Protocole n. 16 à la Conv. EDH, introduisant un mécanisme consultatif devant la Cour EDH, ainsi que les perspectives offertes par le Protocole n. 15 à la Conv. EDH et par la possible adhésion de l’Union au système conventionnel, viennent recentrer le rôle reconnu à la Cour EDH en tant que juridiction régulatrice d’un système européen de protection des droits fondamentaux, et favorisent le dépassement du conflit entre la chose jugée et les décisions européennes en faveur du paradigme du "dialogue" entre les juges. / The effect of res judicata (also known as “a thing adjudged), an expression of the stability requirement of the jurisdictional decisions and the sovereign state’s capacity to exercise its jurisdictional power by making the final judgement on the matter, is a concept strongly connected with the criminal process which constitutes its natural result. In the last few years, as a result of solicitations of supranational origin whose domestic law is subject, res judicata also undergoes a process of erosion of its irrefutable nature. In particular, while the conflict between res judicata and decisions of the Court of Justice of European Union appears to be “pathological”, the specificities of the conventional system of human right protection provoke a virtually “physiological” conflict with the the doctrine of res judicata in domestic law. This is done considering the principle of subsidiarity and the exhaustion of domestic remedies which characterize the appeal to the European Court of Human Rights jointly with the fact that the requirement of the effective "restitutio in integrum" of the applicant victim of a recognized breach of his rights imposes an obligation to reopen the domestic proceedings, according to article 46 ECHR. The thesis analyses under the angle of Italian and French law, the concepts underlying the conflict, especially the value of res judicata and the impact of European systems of protection of fundamental rights on the internal criminal process, secondly, to examine the concrete ways in which the two legal orders have allowed the effect of res judicata to be exceeded in order to guarantee the execution of ECHR judgments. In this context, the recent entry into force of the Protocol n. 16 at EDH, introducing a consultative mechanism before the ECHR, as well as the prospects outlined by the Protocol n. 15 at ECHR and by the possible accession of the European Union to the conventional system, refocus the recognized role of the ECHR as a regulatory jurisdiction of the European protection system for fundamental rights, and promote the overcoming of the conflict between res judicata and European decisions in favor of the "dialogue" between judges.

Inom ramen för Förenta nationernas internationella handelsorgan United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) har en konvention om internationella medlingsförfaranden (Singaporekonventionen) antagits. Denna syftar till att harmonisera den internationella handelsrätten, särskilt avseende alternativa tvistelösningsmetoder. I Sverige finns sedan 2011 lagen om medling i vissa privaträttsliga tvister, som reglerar hela medlingsprocessen, från hur förfarandet ska gå tillväga till hur en eventuell överenskommelse kan erhålla status som en exekutionstitel. Denna status nås, enligt svensk rätt, genom att en domstol meddelar en verkställbarhetsförklaring. Vid en prövning av en ansökan om verkställbarhetsförklaring från parterna, ska en domstol meddela förklaringen om innehållet i avtalet är sådant att det kan verkställas i Sverige. Avseende dessa så kallade vägransgrunder, går Singaporekonventionen längre och tillåter att en domstol vägrar att förklara en överenskommelse verkställbar om avtalet på något sätt är ogiltigt. Följaktligen medför Singaporekonventionen en mer omfattande prövning för domstolen, i och med att fler faktorer behöver beaktas innan en verkställbarhetsförklaring meddelas. En annan konsekvens är å andra sidan att risken för materiellt oriktiga verkställbarhetsförklaringar undviks i högre utsträckning.   Konventionen aktualiserar dessutom andra frågeställningar, nämligen hur en domstol ska hantera en invändning om att en medlingsöverenskommelse redan har avgjort saken som är föremål för talan i ett ordinärt, dispositivt, tvistemål. Överenskommelsen kan inte i sig utgöra en grund för att rättegångshinder föreligger, i och med att bestämmelsen om res judicata tar sikte på situationer där saken har varit föremål för en materiell prövning, vilket en ansökan om verkställbarhetsförklaring inte kan anses ha varit. Däremot medför en medlingsöverenskommelse en bevisverkan, i form av att parterna har avsagt sig att åberopa de eventuellt tillämpliga materiella bestämmelserna till förmån för det avtal som medlingsöverenskommelsen är ett uttryck för.

In this thesis, the common law crime of obstructing or defeating the course of justice as currently applied in South African law, is considered critically. The purpose of the study is to determine whether the ambit of the crime should be extended to target all conduct which undermines the proper administration of justice in South Africa. The interests protected by the crime are investigated, and those important constitutional values which underpin the crime, are identified. These values are: (i) constitutional supremacy (ii) the rule of law (iii) the doctrine of separation of powers, and (iv) the independence of the courts. In a post-constitutional era, the question raised is whether the crime as developed in the common law adequately protects these important democratic values. The historical background and development of the offence are discussed. This is followed by a comparative legal study which considers the existence and ambit of the offence in certain foreign jurisdictions. The foreign legal systems considered are England, Australia, Canada and the United States of America. The study reveals that the crime has been codified in most of these jurisdictions. Codification was driven by the need for legal certainty and compliance with constitutional imperatives. The study concludes that similar reform is necessary in South African criminal law. It is recommended that the common law offence of obstructing or defeating the course of justice be repealed and replaced with a comprehensive statutory offence which criminalises all manifestations of conduct which are intended to defeat or obstruct the proper administration of justice. The proposals are based upon the identified constitutional imperatives which underpin the crime. It is argued that the legislature is the proper institution to initiate reform in this regard. Detailed recommendations are made, which include draft legislation. / Law / LL.D.

Le jugement d’annulation d’une décision administrative a, au Liban comme en France, une autorité de la chose jugée. Cette autorité est relative, face à l’administration, au requérant et au juge qui a rendu le jugement d’annulation et absolue face au tiers et aux autres juges.Cet effet absolu peut mettre en question les intérêts et les droits des tiers qu’ils croyaient acquis. Pour des raisons liées à la stabilité des situations juridiques, le juge administratif, en France plus qu’au Liban, fait prévaloir les droits des tiers sur le principe de légalité. Les tiers peuvent intervenir en cours d’instance ou recourir à la tierce opposition.Le juge administratif et le législateur ont mis des procédures d’incitation pour aider l’administration à respecter l’autorité de la chose jugée, ils ont même posé des procédures de contrainte.Autre cette particularité d’effet dans l’espace, le jugement d’annulation a une caractéristique d’effet dans le temps. L’annulation d’un acte administratif a pour conséquence la suppression rétroactive de cet acte. Cette disparition est parfois difficile voire impossible et provoque des dommages importants sur la sécurité des situations juridiques.Le juge administratif, français autant que libanais, a été persuadé à trouver des solutions de nature de limiter les inconvénients de cette rétroactivité, telles la théorie du service fait et la théorie du fonctionnaire de fait, et la modulation de l’effet rétroactif de jugement d’annulation. / Annulment’s judgment of an administrative decision, in Lebanon and France, has the authority of res judicata. This authority is relative facing the administration, the applicant and the judge who delivered the judgment of annulment and it’s absolute face the third parties and other judges.This absolute effect may question the interests and rights of third parties that they believed acquired. For reasons related to the stability of legal situations, the administrative court in France more than in Lebanon, upholding rights of third parties on the principle of legality. Third parties may intervene in the proceedings or resort to third opposition.The administrative judge and the legislature have incentive procedures to help the administration to respect the authority of res judicata, they even asked constraint procedures.Another special feature of this effect in space, the annulment judgment has effect characteristic in time. The annulment of an administrative act results in the retroactive elimination of the act. This disappearance is difficult sometimes even impossible and causes significant damage to the security of legal situations.The administrative judge, especially French, was persuaded to find solutions to limit the inconvenience of retroactivity, as the done service theory, the fact employee theory, and modulation of the retroactive effect of the judgment annulment.

S’il est une activité judiciaire qui exprime à elle seule les métamorphoses de la fonction de juger, c’est bien celle de l’homologation, procédure judiciaire qui assure le contrôle d’actes déjà valides entre les parties ou qui le deviendront si leur conformité aux exigences du droit substantiel est judiciairement reconnue. Mais si l’homologation implique toujours un acte conventionnel auquel s’adjoint une intervention du juge, force est d’observer que les procédures d’homologation n’ont de commun que le nom. Car, ce que l’on désigne par homologation judiciaire, ce sont, en termes de finalités, des procédures distinctes les unes des autres. Il faut dire que les règles procédurales de l’homologation judiciaire dépendent fortement du droit substantiel en cause. Ici, le fond commande la procédure. C’est le droit de fond qui, dans chaque matière dans laquelle l’homologation est demandée, dicte sa conduite procédurale au juge. A preuve, l’étendue du contrôle judiciaire exercé sur l’acte des parties. Large en matière administrative et en droit du travail, le contrôle judiciaire est restreint dans le cadre des autres transactions extrajudiciaires. Qu’en est-il du régime des accords homologués ? C’est encore, et d’abord, une affaire de droit substantiel. On pourrait multiplier les exemples. Bornons-nous à l’autorité de la chose jugée, reconnue à l’accord homologué dans les matières pénale et de divorce consensuel, et refusée à l’acte notarié homologué en matière de changement de régime matrimonial. Chose jugée également reconnue aux transactions homologuées en matière administrative, mais refusée aux transactions homologuées dans les matières civiles. Ces brèves indications confortent sans doute cette idée que l’homologation judiciaire relève d’abord des exigences du droit substantiel. Elles expriment aussi le fait qu’il n’existe pas une, mais des notions d’homologation. Partant, l’activité judiciaire d’homologation des actes juridiques se prêtera mal à une théorie générale. / Judicial approval shows in a remarkable way how the function of judging contains different aspects. This Judicial activity is in itself a judicial procedure which ensures the control of agreements validly concluded between parties or which will become valid if their conformity with the requirements of substantive law is judicially recognized / if their conformity with the requirements of substantive law is established/ if these agreements fulfil the conditions required by the substantive law.If there is no doubt that the process of judicial homologation is unique, it must be however observed that the homologation procedures according to their purposes are distinct from each other. In fact, the procedural rules of judicial approval/judicial depend considerably on the substantive law to be applied. That’s why, it can be said in this context, that substantive law controls procedural law; for it is substantive law which determines the judge's procedural conduct when judicial approval is requested. The degree or level of the judicial control exercised over the agreements of the parties is a proof of this.What about the registration judgment regime? It is inspired by the substantive law of each subject in which the registration judgment is rendered. We could give more examples. Let us confine ourselves to the authority of res judicata, allowed in the approved agreement on divorce by mutual consent, and refused in the approved notarial deed on change of matrimonial regime. The authority of res judicata is also considered to be admitted for certified transactions in administrative matters, but rejected for certified transactions in civil matters. These brief indications probably support the idea that judicial homologation is primarily a matter of substantive law. In other words, contrary to what is often said in doctrine, homologation is a matter of substantive law before it is a procedural matter.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mariana de Souza Cabezas.pdf: 1150017 bytes, checksum: 1b65dc9d20c52f075017a59c731fdcf3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-03-02 / The present master thesis deals with a new mechanism introduced by the new Brazilian Civil Procedure Code, called urgent interim relief , which stabilizes the effects of decisions that grant advance protection. Such interim relief is required in an anticipatory manner, prior to the defendant s response; in case the relief is granted and no appeal is filed against it aiming to invalidate, revoke or reform it, within two years, then the decision is stabilized. The matter was addressed under the perspective that this mechanism was included by the Brazilian legislator among other mechanisms of different jurisdictional reliefs, granted in summary proceedings, in which the adversary system is not only postponed, but also depends on the interested party s request for it to happen. The analysis carried out herein took the new approach given to the constitutional concept of jurisdictional relief as a starting point; thus, it encompasses the objective of enhancing several principles and rights protected by the due process of law guarantee, which included the principles of effectiveness, adversarial system, full defense and the right to trial within a reasonable time. Historically, the grant of jurisdictional reliefs has always been linked to an ordinary process that privileged a full examination of the facts involved in the controversy, thus worshiping the principles of certainty and legal safety. Such dogma was overruled, along with other ones, and the main reason for it derived from giving autonomy for these interim reliefs. However, controversies always arise from major changes; therefore, this thesis also analyzes the setbacks generally mentioned concerning the stabilization of this interim relief, as well as verifies its possible comparison with the effects caused by res judicata / A presente dissertação cuidou da análise da possibilidade, prevista no novo Código de Processo Civil, de estabilização dos efeitos da decisão concessiva da tutela antecipada de urgência, requerida em caráter antecedente, à míngua da competente impugnação pela parte contrária e do transcurso do prazo de dois anos previsto para o ajuizamento de ação tendente a invalidar, revogar ou reformá-la. Abordou-se a matéria sob a perspectiva de sua inserção no rol de mecanismos tendentes à conferência de tutela jurisdicional diferenciada, mediante provimento sumário autônomo, em que o contraditório é diferido e eventual, pois dependente do impulso processual da parte interessada e legitimada a fazê-lo. Para tanto, analisou-se o novo enfoque conferido ao conceito de tutela jurisdicional, com a promulgação da Constituição Federal de 1988, como forma de melhor concretizar os princípios constitucionais da efetividade da tutela jurisdicional, do contraditório, da ampla defesa e da razoável duração do processo, corolários do devido processo legal. Isso porque, historicamente, a prestação da tutela jurisdicional sempre esteve subordinada a um formato do processo que primava pela ordinariedade, mediante a cognição exauriente, em vista dos reclamos, igualmente relevantes, de paridade de armas entre os litigantes e dos imperativos de certeza e segurança jurídica. Verificou-se a superação desse dogma, e ainda, da instrumentalidade, acessoriedade e provisoriedade da tutela de urgência, mediante a autonomização daquela que for requerida em caráter antecedente. E, por fim, analisou-se as controvérsias em torno da estabilidade conferida ao provimento antecipatório e sua eventual equiparação aos efeitos da coisa julgada material