Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2007 |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
Texto Completo: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13873 |
Resumo: | The following study aims to verify in which hypothesis res judicata, when it comes of an unconstitutional decision, shall not prevail over Constitution. It displayed the characteristics of formal and material constitutional systems. It debated the concepts of existence, validity and efficacy of juridical rules and acts. It dissertated about the idea of Constitution s superiority and about the birth of the judicial review of constitutionality. It focused some contemporary models of this judicial review and its historical evolution in Brazil, showing its effects towards the current Constitution. It sustained that the decision given by Supremo Tribunal Federal during abstract control of rules must bind even legislative bodies, preventing them to produce the same rules previously declared unconstitutional. It held up that all parts of the decision of Supremo Tribunal Federal oblige, even the juridical arguments employed, in both diffused and concentrated reviews. It showed that, despite these models of review live together in Brazil, our constitutional system preferred the concentrated one, considering one only court over the other constitutional organs. It discussed about res judicata with the purpose of clarifying its juridical nature, its objective and subjective limits and its regulation in collective demands. It explained that the material res judicata is an effect of a decision which cannot be reviewed, which makes the law s will free of discussion, binding the contendants and avoiding that other courts, judging future demands about the same object, may decide differently. It showed how the regulation of res judicata in collective demands, in respect oh their subjective limits, is useful to demonstrate that it is not the material law who must adapt itself to res judicata as traditionally thought, but res judicata, as a warranty of juridical certainty and security, who must be shaped from the debated rule. It presented to view the main doctrinal conceptions about res judicata s review in the hypothesis of unconstitutional judgement. It concluded that the decisions forged by unconstitutional rules or interpretations reputed not compatible to the Constitution by Supremo Tribunal Federal, in spite of it can make res judicata, may be reviewed beyond the term to file a recissory claim, since while the debated law is still valid, no matter if its decision was before or after the res judicata. At the end, it asserted that, when it is not legally authorized, the judicial review of res judicata is not admissible, after the term to file a recissory claim, under the argument that there was no direct violation to the constitutional principle or rule |
id |
UFRN_42fe6f488d114fe25502559acdcb8a59 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/13873 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRN |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Marques, Andreo Aleksandro Nobrehttp://lattes.cnpq.br/6219856215182127Bonifácio, Artur Cortezhttp://lattes.cnpq.br/6950519368299462Cavalcanti, Francisco de Queiroz Bezerrahttp://lattes.cnpq.br/39557537369127282014-12-17T14:27:07Z2008-03-302014-12-17T14:27:07Z2007-07-09MARQUES, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre. Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado. 2007. 38 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Constituição e Garantias de Direitos) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2007.https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13873The following study aims to verify in which hypothesis res judicata, when it comes of an unconstitutional decision, shall not prevail over Constitution. It displayed the characteristics of formal and material constitutional systems. It debated the concepts of existence, validity and efficacy of juridical rules and acts. It dissertated about the idea of Constitution s superiority and about the birth of the judicial review of constitutionality. It focused some contemporary models of this judicial review and its historical evolution in Brazil, showing its effects towards the current Constitution. It sustained that the decision given by Supremo Tribunal Federal during abstract control of rules must bind even legislative bodies, preventing them to produce the same rules previously declared unconstitutional. It held up that all parts of the decision of Supremo Tribunal Federal oblige, even the juridical arguments employed, in both diffused and concentrated reviews. It showed that, despite these models of review live together in Brazil, our constitutional system preferred the concentrated one, considering one only court over the other constitutional organs. It discussed about res judicata with the purpose of clarifying its juridical nature, its objective and subjective limits and its regulation in collective demands. It explained that the material res judicata is an effect of a decision which cannot be reviewed, which makes the law s will free of discussion, binding the contendants and avoiding that other courts, judging future demands about the same object, may decide differently. It showed how the regulation of res judicata in collective demands, in respect oh their subjective limits, is useful to demonstrate that it is not the material law who must adapt itself to res judicata as traditionally thought, but res judicata, as a warranty of juridical certainty and security, who must be shaped from the debated rule. It presented to view the main doctrinal conceptions about res judicata s review in the hypothesis of unconstitutional judgement. It concluded that the decisions forged by unconstitutional rules or interpretations reputed not compatible to the Constitution by Supremo Tribunal Federal, in spite of it can make res judicata, may be reviewed beyond the term to file a recissory claim, since while the debated law is still valid, no matter if its decision was before or after the res judicata. At the end, it asserted that, when it is not legally authorized, the judicial review of res judicata is not admissible, after the term to file a recissory claim, under the argument that there was no direct violation to the constitutional principle or ruleEste estudo colimou verificar em que hipóteses a coisa julgada, quando decorrente de uma sentença inconstitucional, não deve prevalecer sobre a Constituição. Apresentou as características dos sistemas constitucionais de índole formal e material. Debateu os conceitos de existência, validade e eficácia das normas e atos jurídicos. Discorreu sobre a idéia de superioridade da Constituição e sobre o surgimento do controle de constitucionalidade. Enfocou alguns modelos contemporâneos de controle de constitucionalidade. Resgatou a evolução histórica do controle de constitucionalidade no Brasil e mostrou os efeitos resultantes do referido controle sob a égide da atual Constituição. Defendeu que a decisão proferida pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal em controle abstrato de normas deve vincular inclusive os órgãos do Poder Legislativo, obstando-os de produzir norma de idêntico conteúdo àquela julgada inconstitucional. Sustentou que, além dos dispositivos, também os fundamentos jurídicos relevantes dos julgados do Supremo Tribunal Federal são dotados de eficácia vinculante, sejam manifestados no controle difuso, sejam no concentrado. Mostrou que, apesar da convivência no Brasil dos controles difuso e concentrado de constitucionalidade, nosso sistema constitucional optou pela primazia do controle concentrado de normas em um único tribunal, órgão de cúpula de todos os órgãos constitucionais. Discutiu o instituto da coisa julgada a fim de esclarecer sua natureza jurídica, seus limites objetivos e subjetivos, e seu tratamento nas demandas coletivas. Explicou que a coisa julgada material é o efeito da sentença não mais passível de impugnação, que torna a afirmação da vontade da lei no caso concreto indiscutível, vinculando as partes e impedindo que os órgãos jurisdicionais, em processos futuros versando sobre o mesmo bem da vida, voltem a se manifestar sobre aquilo que já foi decidido definitivamente. Explanou que o tratamento da coisa julgada na tutela coletiva, no que diz respeito aos limites subjetivos, serve para demonstrar que não é o direito material que tem que se adaptar ao instituto da coisa julgada, tal como este foi pensado tradicionalmente, mas é a coisa julgada, como meio garantidor da certeza e segurança jurídicas, que deve se amoldar ao direito debatido. Expôs as principais concepções doutrinárias existentes acerca da possibilidade de revisão da coisa julgada em caso de ato jurisdicional inconstitucional. Concluiu que as sentenças definitivas fundadas em lei ou ato normativo que tenham sido declarados inconstitucionais, ou em aplicação ou interpretação tidas por incompatíveis com a Constituição, pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, apesar de fazerem coisa julgada, podem, além do prazo da ação rescisória, ser revistas, desde que antes da prescrição do direito debatido, não importando se a decisão daquela corte foi anterior ou posterior ao trânsito em julgado daquelas decisões. Por fim, asseverou que não é admissível, na falta de expressa autorização legal, a revisão de sentenças transitadas em julgado, após o prazo da ação rescisória, sob o argumento de que houve violação direta de princípio ou regra constitucionalapplication/pdfporUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do NortePrograma de Pós-Graduação em DireitoUFRNBRConstituição e Garantias de DireitosDireito ConstitucionalControle de ConstitucionalidadeCoisa JulgadaConstitutional LawJudicial review of constitutionalityRes judicataCNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITODo controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgadoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRNinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)instacron:UFRNTEXTAndreoANM.pdf.txtAndreoANM.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain70037https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/6/AndreoANM.pdf.txta29ac5e12b807e9e30c4a4fa123249aeMD56ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.txtControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain70037https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/8/ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.txta29ac5e12b807e9e30c4a4fa123249aeMD58THUMBNAILAndreoANM.pdf.jpgAndreoANM.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg2041https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/7/AndreoANM.pdf.jpg9c352c88f3bfe85bb756f1e9f0b12437MD57ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.jpgControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg1338https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/9/ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.jpg40426925d5fa8a83b6110d2833434fefMD59ORIGINALControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdfapplication/pdf875567https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/1/ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdfe26e44e05b3601f8ad37e5f841e56b24MD51123456789/138732019-05-26 02:11:26.631oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/13873Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttp://repositorio.ufrn.br/oai/opendoar:2019-05-26T05:11:26Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)false |
dc.title.por.fl_str_mv |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
title |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
spellingShingle |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado Marques, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre Direito Constitucional Controle de Constitucionalidade Coisa Julgada Constitutional Law Judicial review of constitutionality Res judicata CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO |
title_short |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
title_full |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
title_fullStr |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
title_full_unstemmed |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
title_sort |
Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado |
author |
Marques, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre |
author_facet |
Marques, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.authorID.por.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.advisorID.por.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.advisorLattes.por.fl_str_mv |
http://lattes.cnpq.br/6219856215182127 |
dc.contributor.referees1.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Bonifácio, Artur Cortez |
dc.contributor.referees1ID.por.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.referees1Lattes.por.fl_str_mv |
http://lattes.cnpq.br/6950519368299462 |
dc.contributor.referees2.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Cavalcanti, Francisco de Queiroz Bezerra |
dc.contributor.referees2ID.por.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.referees2Lattes.por.fl_str_mv |
http://lattes.cnpq.br/3955753736912728 |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Marques, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Direito Constitucional Controle de Constitucionalidade Coisa Julgada |
topic |
Direito Constitucional Controle de Constitucionalidade Coisa Julgada Constitutional Law Judicial review of constitutionality Res judicata CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO |
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv |
Constitutional Law Judicial review of constitutionality Res judicata |
dc.subject.cnpq.fl_str_mv |
CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO |
description |
The following study aims to verify in which hypothesis res judicata, when it comes of an unconstitutional decision, shall not prevail over Constitution. It displayed the characteristics of formal and material constitutional systems. It debated the concepts of existence, validity and efficacy of juridical rules and acts. It dissertated about the idea of Constitution s superiority and about the birth of the judicial review of constitutionality. It focused some contemporary models of this judicial review and its historical evolution in Brazil, showing its effects towards the current Constitution. It sustained that the decision given by Supremo Tribunal Federal during abstract control of rules must bind even legislative bodies, preventing them to produce the same rules previously declared unconstitutional. It held up that all parts of the decision of Supremo Tribunal Federal oblige, even the juridical arguments employed, in both diffused and concentrated reviews. It showed that, despite these models of review live together in Brazil, our constitutional system preferred the concentrated one, considering one only court over the other constitutional organs. It discussed about res judicata with the purpose of clarifying its juridical nature, its objective and subjective limits and its regulation in collective demands. It explained that the material res judicata is an effect of a decision which cannot be reviewed, which makes the law s will free of discussion, binding the contendants and avoiding that other courts, judging future demands about the same object, may decide differently. It showed how the regulation of res judicata in collective demands, in respect oh their subjective limits, is useful to demonstrate that it is not the material law who must adapt itself to res judicata as traditionally thought, but res judicata, as a warranty of juridical certainty and security, who must be shaped from the debated rule. It presented to view the main doctrinal conceptions about res judicata s review in the hypothesis of unconstitutional judgement. It concluded that the decisions forged by unconstitutional rules or interpretations reputed not compatible to the Constitution by Supremo Tribunal Federal, in spite of it can make res judicata, may be reviewed beyond the term to file a recissory claim, since while the debated law is still valid, no matter if its decision was before or after the res judicata. At the end, it asserted that, when it is not legally authorized, the judicial review of res judicata is not admissible, after the term to file a recissory claim, under the argument that there was no direct violation to the constitutional principle or rule |
publishDate |
2007 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2007-07-09 |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2008-03-30 2014-12-17T14:27:07Z |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2014-12-17T14:27:07Z |
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 |
MARQUES, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre. Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado. 2007. 38 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Constituição e Garantias de Direitos) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2007. |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13873 |
identifier_str_mv |
MARQUES, Andreo Aleksandro Nobre. Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado. 2007. 38 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Constituição e Garantias de Direitos) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2007. |
url |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13873 |
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.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte |
dc.publisher.program.fl_str_mv |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito |
dc.publisher.initials.fl_str_mv |
UFRN |
dc.publisher.country.fl_str_mv |
BR |
dc.publisher.department.fl_str_mv |
Constituição e Garantias de Direitos |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) instacron:UFRN |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
instacron_str |
UFRN |
institution |
UFRN |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/6/AndreoANM.pdf.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/8/ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.txt https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/7/AndreoANM.pdf.jpg https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/9/ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf.jpg https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13873/1/ControleConstitucionalidadeAtos_Marques_2007.pdf |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
a29ac5e12b807e9e30c4a4fa123249ae a29ac5e12b807e9e30c4a4fa123249ae 9c352c88f3bfe85bb756f1e9f0b12437 40426925d5fa8a83b6110d2833434fef e26e44e05b3601f8ad37e5f841e56b24 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1802117724354117632 |