Agravo de instrumento: a insegurança jurídica e a morosidade na prestação jurisdicional como consequências da mitigação do rol taxativo de interposição do recurso
Carregando...
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2020-12
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Oliveira, Caroline Feitosa
Orientador
Dellore, Luiz Guilherme Pennacchi
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
O presente trabalho se propõe a identificar se existe relação entre o novo regime de
recorribilidade das decisões interlocutórias, instituído pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça quando
da fixação da tese oriunda do julgamento dos recursos reunidos sob o Tema 988, com a
insegurança jurídica e a morosidade na prestação jurisdicional, que aqui serão tratadas como as
duas principais consequências da mitigação do rol taxativo de interposição do agravo de
instrumento. Para tanto, analisa-se o recurso de agravo desde o sistema processual de 1939 até
o de 2015, com as modificações que ocorreram na aplicabilidade do recurso até o precedente
firmado pela Corte Superior. Ao final, procura-se responder o questionamento principal a partir
da análise detalhada do acórdão do Recurso Especial nº 1.704.520, sob a perspectiva dos
institutos da segurança jurídica e celeridade processual, e também a partir dos dados obtidos
junto à jurisprudência do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo.
This dissertation intends to identify if there is a relation between the new regime of the filing of appeals against interlocutory decisions instituted by the Superior Court of Justice, when fixing the thesis arise from the judgment of the appeals gathered under the Theme 988, with legal insecurity and delay in the jurisdictional provision, which will be treated here as the two main consequences of the mitigation of the mandatory list of possibilities to file an interlocutory appeal. To this purpose, that kind of appeal was analyzed since the civil procedural system of 1939 until 2015, along with the changes provoked by the precedent signed by the Superior Court. In the end, it is expected to answer the main question after the analysis of the decision of the Special Appeal No. 1.704.520 from the perspective of the institutes of legal security and procedural promptness and from the data obtained from cases judged by the Court of Appeals of São Paulo.
This dissertation intends to identify if there is a relation between the new regime of the filing of appeals against interlocutory decisions instituted by the Superior Court of Justice, when fixing the thesis arise from the judgment of the appeals gathered under the Theme 988, with legal insecurity and delay in the jurisdictional provision, which will be treated here as the two main consequences of the mitigation of the mandatory list of possibilities to file an interlocutory appeal. To this purpose, that kind of appeal was analyzed since the civil procedural system of 1939 until 2015, along with the changes provoked by the precedent signed by the Superior Court. In the end, it is expected to answer the main question after the analysis of the decision of the Special Appeal No. 1.704.520 from the perspective of the institutes of legal security and procedural promptness and from the data obtained from cases judged by the Court of Appeals of São Paulo.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
agravo de instrumento , rol taxativo , mitigação , Superior Tribunal de Justiça , interlocutory appeal , mandatory list , mitigation , Superior Court of Justice