Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Moura, Renata Helena Paganoto
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Coura, Alexandre de Castro
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista de Direito da Cidade
Texto Completo: https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/rdc/article/view/64019
Resumo: AbstractThe objective of this paper was to fathom how many contradictory decisions about the outcome of the same case are reached in a system of explicit rules. The dialectic method was used to approach decisions previously selected by Purposive non-probability sampling concerning squatting of abandoned properties. As a starting point for the dialectic bias, this study used the dissimilarity between the theoretical common sense of legal experts and the critical knowledge by Warat, along with his critique of the epistemology of concepts and the analysis of the syllogism by Katharina Sobota as presentation style of the court decision. As a result, it was concluded that the theoretical common sense of legal experts disguises strategies of speech. The decision is developed so as to convey a sense of comprehensiveness and logical coherence, failing to disclose that what actually fuels the interpretation of these actions is either the inflexible defense of a liberal property in which the owner is the absolute master of the power legally assigned to him or the defense of the social function of the estate. Despite many advances, the current political arena supports the upkeep of the former. Thus, there is no consensus in the decision-making process of lawsuits about squatting private property: the abandoned estate either “allows entrance” or “does not allow it”. The trespassers are either squatters or occupants.Keywords: Squatting. Invasion. Estate. Abandoned property. Social function of the property.
id UERJ-5_1f586eea18ee2ae2f06519a54eeb98a0
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br:article/64019
network_acronym_str UERJ-5
network_name_str Revista de Direito da Cidade
repository_id_str
spelling Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claimAbstractThe objective of this paper was to fathom how many contradictory decisions about the outcome of the same case are reached in a system of explicit rules. The dialectic method was used to approach decisions previously selected by Purposive non-probability sampling concerning squatting of abandoned properties. As a starting point for the dialectic bias, this study used the dissimilarity between the theoretical common sense of legal experts and the critical knowledge by Warat, along with his critique of the epistemology of concepts and the analysis of the syllogism by Katharina Sobota as presentation style of the court decision. As a result, it was concluded that the theoretical common sense of legal experts disguises strategies of speech. The decision is developed so as to convey a sense of comprehensiveness and logical coherence, failing to disclose that what actually fuels the interpretation of these actions is either the inflexible defense of a liberal property in which the owner is the absolute master of the power legally assigned to him or the defense of the social function of the estate. Despite many advances, the current political arena supports the upkeep of the former. Thus, there is no consensus in the decision-making process of lawsuits about squatting private property: the abandoned estate either “allows entrance” or “does not allow it”. The trespassers are either squatters or occupants.Keywords: Squatting. Invasion. Estate. Abandoned property. Social function of the property.Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro2021-12-08info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/rdc/article/view/6401910.12957/rdc.2021.64019Revista de Direito da Cidade; v. 13 n. 4 (2021): Revista de Direito da Cidade - Vol. 13, N°4; 2098-21272317-7721reponame:Revista de Direito da Cidadeinstname:Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)instacron:UERJenghttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/rdc/article/view/64019/40116Copyright (c) 2022 Revista de Direito da Cidadeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMoura, Renata Helena PaganotoCoura, Alexandre de Castro2022-01-29T10:36:01Zoai:ojs.www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br:article/64019Revistahttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/rdcPUBhttps://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/rdc/oairevistadedireitodacidadeuerj@gmail.com||revistadireitocidade@gmail.com||mjmota1@gmail.com|| mjmota@gmail.com|| gurgel.c@ig.com.br2317-77211809-6077opendoar:2022-01-29T10:36:01Revista de Direito da Cidade - Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
title Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
spellingShingle Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
Moura, Renata Helena Paganoto
title_short Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
title_full Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
title_fullStr Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
title_full_unstemmed Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
title_sort Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
author Moura, Renata Helena Paganoto
author_facet Moura, Renata Helena Paganoto
Coura, Alexandre de Castro
author_role author
author2 Coura, Alexandre de Castro
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Moura, Renata Helena Paganoto
Coura, Alexandre de Castro
description AbstractThe objective of this paper was to fathom how many contradictory decisions about the outcome of the same case are reached in a system of explicit rules. The dialectic method was used to approach decisions previously selected by Purposive non-probability sampling concerning squatting of abandoned properties. As a starting point for the dialectic bias, this study used the dissimilarity between the theoretical common sense of legal experts and the critical knowledge by Warat, along with his critique of the epistemology of concepts and the analysis of the syllogism by Katharina Sobota as presentation style of the court decision. As a result, it was concluded that the theoretical common sense of legal experts disguises strategies of speech. The decision is developed so as to convey a sense of comprehensiveness and logical coherence, failing to disclose that what actually fuels the interpretation of these actions is either the inflexible defense of a liberal property in which the owner is the absolute master of the power legally assigned to him or the defense of the social function of the estate. Despite many advances, the current political arena supports the upkeep of the former. Thus, there is no consensus in the decision-making process of lawsuits about squatting private property: the abandoned estate either “allows entrance” or “does not allow it”. The trespassers are either squatters or occupants.Keywords: Squatting. Invasion. Estate. Abandoned property. Social function of the property.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-12-08
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/rdc/article/view/64019
10.12957/rdc.2021.64019
url https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/rdc/article/view/64019
identifier_str_mv 10.12957/rdc.2021.64019
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/rdc/article/view/64019/40116
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Revista de Direito da Cidade
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Revista de Direito da Cidade
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista de Direito da Cidade; v. 13 n. 4 (2021): Revista de Direito da Cidade - Vol. 13, N°4; 2098-2127
2317-7721
reponame:Revista de Direito da Cidade
instname:Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
instacron:UERJ
instname_str Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
instacron_str UERJ
institution UERJ
reponame_str Revista de Direito da Cidade
collection Revista de Direito da Cidade
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista de Direito da Cidade - Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistadedireitodacidadeuerj@gmail.com||revistadireitocidade@gmail.com||mjmota1@gmail.com|| mjmota@gmail.com|| gurgel.c@ig.com.br
_version_ 1799318454328623104