| Summary: | Submitted by PPG Direito (ppgdir@pucrs.br) on 2018-06-14T19:31:48Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
Juliano_Colombo_dis.pdf: 2025463 bytes, checksum: bc49518e93469d429fc2ebe7689495ba (MD5) === Approved for entry into archive by Sheila Dias (sheila.dias@pucrs.br) on 2018-06-25T17:02:51Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
Juliano_Colombo_dis.pdf: 2025463 bytes, checksum: bc49518e93469d429fc2ebe7689495ba (MD5) === Made available in DSpace on 2018-06-25T17:09:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Juliano_Colombo_dis.pdf: 2025463 bytes, checksum: bc49518e93469d429fc2ebe7689495ba (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2018-03-22 === The present study has the purpose to deepen the subject of contract procedure from the perspective of the fundamental rights of the parties. The issue is addressed by approaching the principles and fundamentals of contract procedure, flowing into its applicability in the executive order, especially in the amount execution. The limits of the contract procedures authorized by article 190 of the Civil Procedure Code are concatenated against procedural publicism and privatism, as well as presented in the bias of a corporative model of process from its insertion in the procedural panorama in the light of formalism-value. It is suggested the correct interpretation of the requirements established in the infraconstitucional scope with a view to the validity in the formation of contract procedure. Transposing the fundamental rights to freedom, legal certainty and effectiveness of the process, negotiation on procedural matters is justified and inserted in the environment of executive process. The impact of formation and application of contract procedure on executive expropriatory measures and on procedural rules is analyzed. It is defended the validity of atypical contract procedure that may imply justified restrictions to the fundamental rights of the parties in the executive process, such as the limitation to the double degree of jurisdiction and the renunciation of unenforceability, based on the correct application of proportionality. === O presente trabalho prop?e-se a aprofundar o tema dos neg?cios jur?dicos processuais na perspectiva dos direitos fundamentais das partes. Enfrenta-se a referida tem?tica, abordando a principiologia e os fundamentos da negocia??o processual a desaguar na sua aplicabilidade na tutela executiva, em especial na execu??o de quantia. Os limites dos neg?cios processuais autorizados pelo art. 190 do C?digo de Processo Civil s?o concatenados frente ao publicismo e privatismo processual, bem como apresentados no vi?s de um modelo cooperativo de processo a partir de sua inser??o no panorama processual ? luz do formalismo-valorativo. Sugere-se a correta interpreta??o dos requisitos estabelecidos em ?mbito infraconstitucional com vistas ? validade na forma??o de neg?cios jur?dicos processuais. Transpassando os direitos fundamentais ? liberdade, ? seguran?a jur?dica e ? efetividade do processo, a negocia??o sobre mat?ria processual ? justificada e inserida no ambiente da tutela executiva. Analisa-se o impacto da forma??o e aplica??o dos neg?cios jur?dicos processuais nas medidas executivas, expropriat?rias e nas normas procedimentais. Defende-se a validade de neg?cios jur?dicos processuais at?picos que possam implicar em restri??es justificadas aos direitos fundamentais das partes no processo executivo, tal como a limita??o ao duplo grau de jurisdi??o e a ren?ncia ? impenhorabilidade, a partir da correta aplica??o da proporcionalidade.
|
|---|
