Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP |
Texto Completo: | https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/23983 |
Resumo: | The res judicata, as an institute of law, proves to be fundamental to the stability of judicial decisions, giving the courts the security they seek in the legal relations they submit to. The study of this institute, however old, always returns to the stage of legal discussions, much for the improvement that ends up suffering with the new challenges to which it is submitted In Brazilian law the res judicata receives great attention from jurists, which leads the institute to gain increasingly sophisticated technical contours. From the institute's inception to the 2015 procedural codification, much has been seen to improve, starting with the recognition of the need for something that could give jurisdictional decision-making certainty to the scope of such decisions. The challenges of legal relations have led the judged thing to be thought through and rethought, being put to the test in everyday life, all in order to give legal certainty to the decisions of the judge state. The scope of what has been decided becomes important when the decision itself is brought into discussion, for the command of what has been decided stabilizes, but has real-world effects. It was up to the law to set the rules for decisions to become unchanged, as well as the people who will be affected and the object of the discussion itself, given that today also discusses the time when the decision will prevail, beyond the physical space. of its influence (territory). One of the limits that make up the res judicata is studied in this paper, namely, the objective limits of the res judicata, or in other words, what is decided, what is the object of the discussion brought to the judiciary that will receive the authority of legal certainty, which will become immutable (and hence undisputed). The way in which objective boundaries are handled by legal rules changed, when the 2015 Civil Procedure Code brought new thinking to the process, with an increasingly bureaucratic approach, greatly simplified it. The purpose of such changes is felt when there is a need to give more efficient answers to the problems brought to the judge state. The intention of this paper is to highlight this evolution, highlighting how the objective elements of the judged thing are treated in procedural coding, before and now. The most recent doctrinal stance, as well as, in conclusion, the idea that the objective limits of the res judicata can, however academically, extend further and become more efficient in response to the jurisdictional |
id |
PUC_SP-1_37cac3893fd86fece46c27ee1185ac85 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.pucsp.br:handle/23983 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_SP-1 |
network_name_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Alvim, Thereza Celina Diniz de Arrudahttp://lattes.cnpq.br/4559787687365798http://lattes.cnpq.br/0903026993534818Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de2021-11-16T14:50:52Z2021-11-16T14:50:52Z2020-05-27Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de. Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada. 2020. Dissertação (Mestrado em Direito) - Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito da Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2020.https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/23983The res judicata, as an institute of law, proves to be fundamental to the stability of judicial decisions, giving the courts the security they seek in the legal relations they submit to. The study of this institute, however old, always returns to the stage of legal discussions, much for the improvement that ends up suffering with the new challenges to which it is submitted In Brazilian law the res judicata receives great attention from jurists, which leads the institute to gain increasingly sophisticated technical contours. From the institute's inception to the 2015 procedural codification, much has been seen to improve, starting with the recognition of the need for something that could give jurisdictional decision-making certainty to the scope of such decisions. The challenges of legal relations have led the judged thing to be thought through and rethought, being put to the test in everyday life, all in order to give legal certainty to the decisions of the judge state. The scope of what has been decided becomes important when the decision itself is brought into discussion, for the command of what has been decided stabilizes, but has real-world effects. It was up to the law to set the rules for decisions to become unchanged, as well as the people who will be affected and the object of the discussion itself, given that today also discusses the time when the decision will prevail, beyond the physical space. of its influence (territory). One of the limits that make up the res judicata is studied in this paper, namely, the objective limits of the res judicata, or in other words, what is decided, what is the object of the discussion brought to the judiciary that will receive the authority of legal certainty, which will become immutable (and hence undisputed). The way in which objective boundaries are handled by legal rules changed, when the 2015 Civil Procedure Code brought new thinking to the process, with an increasingly bureaucratic approach, greatly simplified it. The purpose of such changes is felt when there is a need to give more efficient answers to the problems brought to the judge state. The intention of this paper is to highlight this evolution, highlighting how the objective elements of the judged thing are treated in procedural coding, before and now. The most recent doctrinal stance, as well as, in conclusion, the idea that the objective limits of the res judicata can, however academically, extend further and become more efficient in response to the jurisdictionalA coisa julgada, como instituto do direito, mostra-se fundamental para a estabilidade das decisões judiciais, dando aos jurisdicionados a segurança que procuram nas relações jurídicas que se submetem. O estudo deste instituto, por mais antigo que seja, sempre volta ao palco das discussões jurídicas, muito pelo aperfeiçoamento que acaba sofrendo com os novos desafios a que é submetido. No direito brasileiro a coisa julgada recebe grande atenção dos juristas, o que leva o instituto a ganhar cada vez mais sofisticados contornos técnicos. Do início do instituto até a codificação processual de 2015 muito se viu de aprimoramento, partindo-se do reconhecimento da necessidade de algo que pudesse dar aos jurisdicionados a garantia de estabilidade das decisões até o estudo dos alcances que tais decisões podem ter. Os desafios das relações jurídicas levaram a coisa julgada a ser pensada e repensada, sendo colocada à prova no dia-a-dia, tudo no sentido de dar a segurança jurídica as decisões do Estado-juiz. O alcance do que se decidiu ganha importância quando a própria decisão é levada à discussão, pois o comando do que foi decidido se estabiliza, porém, gera efeitos no mundo real. Coube ao direito estabelecer as regras para as decisões se tornarem imutáveis, bem como, as pessoas que serão atingidas e o objeto da própria discussão, levando-se em conta que hoje se discute também o tempo em que a decisão prevalecerá, além do espaço físico de sua influência (território). Um dos limites que acabam por compor a coisa julgada é estudada neste trabalho, qual seja, os limites objetivos da coisa julgada, ou em outras palavras, o quê se decide, qual o objeto da discussão trazida ao judiciário que receberá a autoridade da segurança jurídica, que se tornará imutável (e consequentemente, indiscutível). A forma com que os limites objetivos são tratados pelas regras jurídicas mudou, quando o código de processo civil de 2015 trouxe nova forma de pensar o processo, com uma maneira cada vez mais desburocratizada, acabou por simplifica-lo em muito. O objetivo de tais mudanças é sentido quando se verifica a necessidade de se dar respostas mais eficientes aos problemas trazidos ao Estado-juiz. A intenção deste trabalho é destacar esta evolução, evidenciando como os elementos objetivos da coisa julgada são tratados na codificação processual, antes e agora. O posicionamento doutrinário mais recente, bem como, em conclusão, deixar consignada a ideia de que os limites objetivos da coisa julgada podem, ainda que academicamente, se estender mais, tornando-se cada vez mais eficiente em resposta ao jurisdicionadoporPontifícia Universidade Católica de São PauloPrograma de Estudos Pós-Graduados em DireitoPUC-SPBrasilFaculdade de DireitoCNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITOCoisa julgadaLimites objetivos da coisa julgadaProcesso civilRes judicataObjective limits of the judged thingCivil procedureOs limites objetivos da coisa julgadainfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SPinstname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)instacron:PUC_SPORIGINALAbner Teixeira de Carvalho.pdfapplication/pdf14449578https://repositorio.pucsp.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/23983/1/Abner%20Teixeira%20de%20Carvalho.pdf988ea4e8cfc2d1006c12d02cb155d6b2MD51TEXTAbner Teixeira de Carvalho.pdf.txtAbner Teixeira de Carvalho.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain230363https://repositorio.pucsp.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/23983/2/Abner%20Teixeira%20de%20Carvalho.pdf.txtca92583e5e44d32da4bb5f449481d997MD52THUMBNAILAbner Teixeira de Carvalho.pdf.jpgAbner Teixeira de Carvalho.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg1146https://repositorio.pucsp.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/23983/3/Abner%20Teixeira%20de%20Carvalho.pdf.jpg66f025f174d50d9e69cded43c7d72ac9MD53handle/239832022-08-22 11:15:49.129oai:repositorio.pucsp.br:handle/23983Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttps://sapientia.pucsp.br/https://sapientia.pucsp.br/oai/requestbngkatende@pucsp.br||rapassi@pucsp.bropendoar:2022-08-22T14:15:49Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
title |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
spellingShingle |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO Coisa julgada Limites objetivos da coisa julgada Processo civil Res judicata Objective limits of the judged thing Civil procedure |
title_short |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
title_full |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
title_fullStr |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
title_full_unstemmed |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
title_sort |
Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada |
author |
Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de |
author_facet |
Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.advisor1.fl_str_mv |
Alvim, Thereza Celina Diniz de Arruda |
dc.contributor.advisor1Lattes.fl_str_mv |
http://lattes.cnpq.br/4559787687365798 |
dc.contributor.authorLattes.fl_str_mv |
http://lattes.cnpq.br/0903026993534818 |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de |
contributor_str_mv |
Alvim, Thereza Celina Diniz de Arruda |
dc.subject.cnpq.fl_str_mv |
CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO |
topic |
CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO Coisa julgada Limites objetivos da coisa julgada Processo civil Res judicata Objective limits of the judged thing Civil procedure |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Coisa julgada Limites objetivos da coisa julgada Processo civil |
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv |
Res judicata Objective limits of the judged thing Civil procedure |
description |
The res judicata, as an institute of law, proves to be fundamental to the stability of judicial decisions, giving the courts the security they seek in the legal relations they submit to. The study of this institute, however old, always returns to the stage of legal discussions, much for the improvement that ends up suffering with the new challenges to which it is submitted In Brazilian law the res judicata receives great attention from jurists, which leads the institute to gain increasingly sophisticated technical contours. From the institute's inception to the 2015 procedural codification, much has been seen to improve, starting with the recognition of the need for something that could give jurisdictional decision-making certainty to the scope of such decisions. The challenges of legal relations have led the judged thing to be thought through and rethought, being put to the test in everyday life, all in order to give legal certainty to the decisions of the judge state. The scope of what has been decided becomes important when the decision itself is brought into discussion, for the command of what has been decided stabilizes, but has real-world effects. It was up to the law to set the rules for decisions to become unchanged, as well as the people who will be affected and the object of the discussion itself, given that today also discusses the time when the decision will prevail, beyond the physical space. of its influence (territory). One of the limits that make up the res judicata is studied in this paper, namely, the objective limits of the res judicata, or in other words, what is decided, what is the object of the discussion brought to the judiciary that will receive the authority of legal certainty, which will become immutable (and hence undisputed). The way in which objective boundaries are handled by legal rules changed, when the 2015 Civil Procedure Code brought new thinking to the process, with an increasingly bureaucratic approach, greatly simplified it. The purpose of such changes is felt when there is a need to give more efficient answers to the problems brought to the judge state. The intention of this paper is to highlight this evolution, highlighting how the objective elements of the judged thing are treated in procedural coding, before and now. The most recent doctrinal stance, as well as, in conclusion, the idea that the objective limits of the res judicata can, however academically, extend further and become more efficient in response to the jurisdictional |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2020-05-27 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2021-11-16T14:50:52Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2021-11-16T14:50:52Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
format |
masterThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv |
Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de. Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada. 2020. Dissertação (Mestrado em Direito) - Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito da Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2020. |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/23983 |
identifier_str_mv |
Carvalho, Abner Teixeira de. Os limites objetivos da coisa julgada. 2020. Dissertação (Mestrado em Direito) - Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito da Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2020. |
url |
https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/23983 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo |
dc.publisher.program.fl_str_mv |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito |
dc.publisher.initials.fl_str_mv |
PUC-SP |
dc.publisher.country.fl_str_mv |
Brasil |
dc.publisher.department.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade de Direito |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) instacron:PUC_SP |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
instacron_str |
PUC_SP |
institution |
PUC_SP |
reponame_str |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP |
collection |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.pucsp.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/23983/1/Abner%20Teixeira%20de%20Carvalho.pdf https://repositorio.pucsp.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/23983/2/Abner%20Teixeira%20de%20Carvalho.pdf.txt https://repositorio.pucsp.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/23983/3/Abner%20Teixeira%20de%20Carvalho.pdf.jpg |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
988ea4e8cfc2d1006c12d02cb155d6b2 ca92583e5e44d32da4bb5f449481d997 66f025f174d50d9e69cded43c7d72ac9 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
bngkatende@pucsp.br||rapassi@pucsp.br |
_version_ |
1809277888170557440 |