Execução contra o poder público: o caos do regime de precatórios

• Autor(a) principal: Roberti, Fabiana Buzzini
• Data de Publicação: 2013
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/34014
• topic: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO::DIREITO PUBLICO::DIREITO PROCESSUAL CIVIL

This work has the purpose to demonstrate that the execution of an obligation to pay a right amount against the public Treasury follows a special rite. The main difference in such an execution is in the imminence of precatories (pay orders) be constitutionally processed. Previously, the payment of debts from decisions made in judged processes was confusing and not so reliable. There was not a demand for either a respect of a cronological order, an overruling of case assignments, people to pay the debt, or even the arresting macanism. However, despite the imminence of a precatório on a constitutional basis, work for moralizing the debt paying system of Public Treasury, as well as for strengthening the State of Rights, as it praised the ethic-juridical principles of morality, impersonality and equality, it is of vital importance in praising the prestige of the process, to cast a critical look over the present execution against the Public Treasury system. The discussion is divided into three chapters. At first, the Institute of precatory, tupiniquim invention, is shown from its remote source, when it emerged as a factor of moralization, until today, that seems to represent the opposite. The intent is exactly pointing legislative changes that undermined the systematic execution by right in the face amount of the Treasury. The analysis proceeds in the second chapter with the presentation of the procedural prerogatives of the government and its main foundation, namely, the defense of the public interest, which is also reminded to justify the existence of systematic of the. At this point, therefore, the goal is to, first, show differential treatment that the Treasury receives in the process, generally, and then further study the peculiar form of execution for the amount against public entities. The third chapter then discussed some aspects are relevant and controversial on the systematic of the especially those confined to the procedural field. What is the legal nature of the act of the President of the court of justice in the court order processing? It is possible to talk about the kidnapping of public funds and federal intervention in the state for nonpayment of a court order? The provisional execution is possible in the face of the Treasury? These are examples of questions that will be worked out in the third chapter. At the end of that segment