Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-14T14:34:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
458908.pdf: 130044 bytes, checksum: 6f621537112f1eaf4bada6e7cce07cf2 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2014-03-31 / This study examines the juridical institutions of diffuse interests, the class action and res judicata, seeking to highlight the relevant aspects of each one and those who serve as point of contact between the three topics, as well as to contextualize the problem in the historical the present days. Based on these data, discussed in the light of the doctrine and jurisprudence, as well as U.S. law, it is concluded that, arrived postmodernity, the solid and rigorous institute of res judicata, in the field of common interests and headquarters in the context of class action, not fully meet the needs of judicial protection of fundamental rights, as well as their guarantees sisters (acquired right and perfect juridical act), to the point where courts allocate the claim that no one has the right to purchase pollute. Diffuse interests, on the other hand, involve constitutional rights and especially the fundamental rights of the human person and of humanity itself, such as the right to a healthy environment, defended in court by legitimate entities, seeking to safeguard interests of non individualized people. Considering class action related to discretionary administrative act, the sentence may be in based on opportunity and convenience, making no res judicata. In the case of class action, the objective law should be treated as law, submitting to the revocability, which is consistent with the times of liquid modernity and streets taken by the social body multitude. / Este estudo examina os institutos jur?dicos dos interesses difusos, da a??o civil p?blica e da coisa julgada, procurando ressaltar os aspectos mais relevantes de cada um e aqueles que servem de ponto de contato entre os tr?s temas, n?o sem antes contextualizar o problema no momento hist?rico da atualidade. Com base nesses dados, discutidos ? luz da doutrina e da jurisprud?ncia, bem como do direito norte-americano, conclui-se que, chegados os dias da p?s-modernidade, o vetusto e rigoroso instituto da coisa julgada, no campo dos interesses difusos e em sede de a??o civil p?blica, n?o mais responde plenamente ?s necessidades de salvaguarda judicial dos direitos fundamentais, tanto quanto suas garantias irm?s (direito adquirido e ato jur?dico perfeito), ao ponto de os tribunais consagrarem a afirma??o de que ningu?m possui o direito adquirido de poluir. Portanto, a imutabilidade da senten?a n?o pode, em tempos de modernidade l?quida e de ruas tomadas pelo corpo social sem rosto (multid?o), servir de bloqueio para que o Judici?rio assegure a todos os direitos difusos, consagrados como direitos de ?ndole objetiva.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:tede2.pucrs.br:tede/4260 |
| Date | 31 March 2014 |
| Creators | Jardim, Deise Adeni C?caro Nicola Tanger |
| Contributors | Tesheiner, Jos? Maria Rosa |
| Publisher | Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Direito, PUCRS, BR, Faculdade de Direito |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_RS, instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, instacron:PUC_RS |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | -1046629855937119302, 500, 600, 2194221341323903125 |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds