O dever fundamental de preservar a incolumidade das pessoas (art. 144, crfb/88) e a atuação na prevenção de suicídios: o caso da terceira ponte - Rodosol/es

• Autor(a) principal: Uliana, Eduardo Bergamim
• Data de Publicação: 2017
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório da Faculdade de Direito de Vitória
• Texto Completo: http://191.252.194.60:8080/handle/fdv/389
• topic: Suicídio na Terceira Ponte; Direitos e deveres fundamentais; Custos dos direitos; CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO

This monograph sought to analyze whether or not Rodosol, a concessionaire that manages the Bridge Bridge Darcy Castelo de Mendonça (Third Bridge), has or does not have a fundamental duty to preserve the safety of persons (article 144, CRFB / 88), acting in the prevention of suicides occurring on the spot. In addition, it was analyzed who would bear the costs of these preventive measures implemented. The method used was the case study, considering that the cases of suicides that occur in the Third Bridge / ES, are shown as a current phenomenon, inserted in the reality of the State of Espírito Santo, the case study being the appropriate method . In the end, it was possible to conclude that the concessionaire Rodosol, a legal entity, also has the fundamental duty to preserve the safety of people, acting in the prevention of suicide cases that occur in the Third Bridge, based on two rights provided in the Constitution Federal law of 1988, namely: the right to life and public safety. It was also verified that the fundamental duty to preserve the safety of persons (Article 144 of the CRFB / 88) is the responsibility of all. Thus, with equity, it was understood that the cost arising from the specific measures adopted to prevent the suicide cases occurring in the Third Bridge should be borne by the whole society, through taxes, ensuring the economic and financial balance of the contract of granted between Rodosol and the State of Espírito Santo.