As dimensões dos princípios constitucionais da justa e prévia indenização e da economicidade no tema nº 865, do Supremo Tribunal Federal
Carregando...
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2024-05
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Oliveira, Jean Leles de
Orientador
Bruno, Reinaldo Moreira
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
O artigo 5º, inciso XXIV, da Constituição Federal de 1988, prevê que a lei estabelecerá o
procedimento de desapropriação, a qual deve ocorrer mediante justa e prévia indenização em
dinheiro. Por seu turno, o artigo 100, do Texto Constitucional, dispõe que os valores devidos
pelas Fazendas Públicas Federal, Estaduais e Municipais, em virtude de sentença judiciária,
deve se sujeitar ao regime de precatórios. Ocorre que, o artigo 15, do Decreto-Lei nº 3.365/41,
permite ao expropriante, mediante alegação de urgência, ser imitido provisoriamente na posse
de eventual imóvel desapropriado, bastando que efetue o depósito da oferta inicial
unilateralmente oferecida. Diante disso, surge manifesta antinomia jurídica em relação aos
2 (dois) parâmetros constitucionais aqui elencados, os quais foram objeto de deliberação pelo
STF no Tema nº 865, estabelecendo que, se houver necessidade de complemento da indenização
por ocasião da instrução probatória, o pagamento deve ser feito diretamente por depósito
judicial caso o Poder Público não esteja em dia com os precatórios. O objetivo da presente
monografia, submetida à Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie para obtenção do título de
bacharel em Direito, é abordar as dimensões do princípio da justa e prévia indenização e da
economicidade em relação à tese ora reportada. É abordado o direito de propriedade, o
procedimento expropriatório e princípios que o regem, bem como a tese firmada pelo STF.
Espera-se, portanto, contribuir para a análise sobre o benefício ao expropriado em receber a
indenização integralmente em dinheiro, que isenta o Poder Público de pagar quantias
significativas a título de juros compensatórios em conjugação dos princípios da justa e prévia
indenização e da economicidade. A metodologia utilizada no artigo foi jurídico-dogmática de
modelo hermenêutico com raciocínio dedutivo embasado em consulta a websites, doutrina e
análise legislativa.
The Federal Constitution of 1988, under the terms of article 5, item XXIV, provides that the Law will be based on the expropriation procedure, which must occur through fair and prior monetary compensation. In turn, article 100 of the Constitutional Text, determines that the amount owed by the Federal, State and Municipal Public Treasury, as a result of a court decision, is subject to a precatorio regime. It happens that, article 15 of Decree-Law no. 3,365/41, allows the expropriator, upon allegation of urgency, be temporarily granted possession of any expropriated property, simply by depositing the initial offer unilaterally offered. Therefore, becomes a legal contradiction in relation of 2 (two) constitutional factors, which were the subject of deliberation by STF in Topic No. 865, establishing that if there is a need to supplement the compensation, by the evidentiary instruction, must be made by judicial deposit, in case the Public Authority isn’t up to date with court orders. The objective of this monograph, submitted to Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie to obtain a degree in Law, is to discuss about the dimensions of the principle of fair and prior compensation and economicity in relation to the dissertation above-mentioned. It’s addresses the property law, expropriation procedure and the principles that conduct, as well as the discussion establish by STF. It’s expected, therefore, contribute with the analysis of the benefit to the expropriated person by receiving a full cash compensation, that let free the Public Authoritis from pay of significant amounts by compensation interest, by combination with the principles of fair and prior compensation and economicity. The methodology used in the article was a legal-dogmatic hermeneutic model with deductive reasoning based on consultation of websites, doctrine and legislative analysis.
The Federal Constitution of 1988, under the terms of article 5, item XXIV, provides that the Law will be based on the expropriation procedure, which must occur through fair and prior monetary compensation. In turn, article 100 of the Constitutional Text, determines that the amount owed by the Federal, State and Municipal Public Treasury, as a result of a court decision, is subject to a precatorio regime. It happens that, article 15 of Decree-Law no. 3,365/41, allows the expropriator, upon allegation of urgency, be temporarily granted possession of any expropriated property, simply by depositing the initial offer unilaterally offered. Therefore, becomes a legal contradiction in relation of 2 (two) constitutional factors, which were the subject of deliberation by STF in Topic No. 865, establishing that if there is a need to supplement the compensation, by the evidentiary instruction, must be made by judicial deposit, in case the Public Authority isn’t up to date with court orders. The objective of this monograph, submitted to Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie to obtain a degree in Law, is to discuss about the dimensions of the principle of fair and prior compensation and economicity in relation to the dissertation above-mentioned. It’s addresses the property law, expropriation procedure and the principles that conduct, as well as the discussion establish by STF. It’s expected, therefore, contribute with the analysis of the benefit to the expropriated person by receiving a full cash compensation, that let free the Public Authoritis from pay of significant amounts by compensation interest, by combination with the principles of fair and prior compensation and economicity. The methodology used in the article was a legal-dogmatic hermeneutic model with deductive reasoning based on consultation of websites, doctrine and legislative analysis.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
desapropriação , justa e prévia indenização , regime de precatórios , tema nº 865, STF , expropriation , fair and prior compensation , precatorio regime , topic No. 865, STF