Obrigações (Direito Civil) - Resumo Completo

Summary

The video script delves into the evolution of obligations under Brazilian Civil Law, contrasting the classical and modern perspectives. The classical view treated obligations as rigid, binding relationships between debtor and creditor, whereas the modern approach recognizes obligations as dynamic, relational, and impactful on third parties. It covers the types of obligations—such as giving, doing, and refraining from actions—and explores their various classifications, including facultative, alternative, and indivisible obligations. The script also distinguishes between obligations of means and result, emphasizing their implications in legal practice and everyday scenarios.

Takeaways

• 😀 The 1916 Civil Code was built on the liberal-individualistic perspective of the French Civil Code, focusing on private law and not the Federal Constitution.
• 😀 In the classical concept of obligation, there was a focus on a 'link' between creditor and debtor, but this has been replaced by the idea of a complex legal relationship.
• 😀 Modern obligations involve not just the parties (creditor and debtor) but also third parties, shifting the focus from 'link' to 'relationship.'
• 😀 In the classical obligation system, key elements included the subjective subject (creditor or debtor), the objective element (the performance or prestation), and the spiritual link (the obligation).
• 😀 The 'debt' (obligation to fulfill) and 'civil responsibility' (legal consequence of non-fulfillment) are distinct concepts in dualist theory, which allows for scenarios where a debt exists but responsibility does not, or vice versa.
• 😀 The modern understanding of obligations includes a dynamic, evolving relationship rather than a static link, with both immediate and indirect sources of obligations such as law, contracts, torts, and unilateral acts.
• 😀 Obligations can be classified by their prestation types: giving (e.g., delivery of a thing), doing (e.g., providing a service), and not doing (e.g., refraining from certain actions).
• 😀 Obligations to give specific things are categorized as either certain or uncertain; 'certain' refers to things identified by their specific characteristics, while 'uncertain' refers to things identified by their type and quantity.
• 😀 In cases of loss or deterioration of the object of obligation, the Civil Code provides specific guidelines on whether the loss is with or without fault from the debtor, impacting the resolution of the obligation.
• 😀 Obligations can be simple or compound, depending on the number of subjects and objects involved, with compound obligations further divided into cumulative and alternative, affecting how the debtor fulfills their duty.

Q & A

What is the primary difference between the classical and modern concepts of obligation in the context of civil law?

The classical concept of obligation focuses on a 'link' or 'vínculo' between the creditor and debtor, while the modern concept emphasizes a 'relationship' or 'relação jurídica', which extends the effects of the obligation beyond just the creditor and debtor to potentially include third parties. The modern concept also recognizes obligations as dynamic and evolving over time.

What is the difference between 'débito' and 'responsabilidade civil' in the dualist theory of obligations?

In the dualist theory, 'débito' refers to the legal duty to fulfill an obligation voluntarily, while 'responsabilidade civil' refers to the civil liability that arises when the obligation is not fulfilled, leading to the possibility of legal action to enforce compliance. A debt can exist without civil liability if the responsibility to enforce the debt is lost, such as in cases of prescription.

How does the classical theory of obligation treat third parties?

In classical theory, the obligation is understood as a relationship strictly between the creditor and debtor. Third parties are not considered in the scope of the obligation. However, in modern theory, the obligation can affect third parties, meaning the consequences of an obligation may extend beyond the immediate parties involved.

What are the different types of obligations regarding the object in civil law?

Obligations can be classified based on the object as obligations of giving (e.g., delivering a thing), making (e.g., performing an action), or not doing (e.g., refraining from an action). Additionally, obligations of giving can be further divided into obligations to deliver a specific thing or a non-specific thing, with specific rules for each case.

What does the concept of 'obligation of giving a specific thing' entail in the context of the Civil Code?

An obligation to give a specific thing refers to an obligation where the thing being delivered is individually identified. If the thing is lost or deteriorated, specific rules apply. For instance, if the loss or deterioration is the debtor's fault, they must compensate the creditor for damages. If the loss is not due to the debtor's fault, the obligation may be resolved differently.

What is the difference between a 'thing specific' and a 'thing uncertain' in the context of obligations?

A 'thing specific' is one that is individually determined, while a 'thing uncertain' is not specifically identified and is defined only by its genus and quantity. In cases of an uncertain thing, the debtor has the right to choose the specific item, a process known as 'concentration'. Once the thing is chosen, it becomes a specific thing, and the rules governing the delivery of specific things apply.

How are obligations classified when there are multiple subjects involved?

Obligations with multiple subjects can be classified as either simple or composite. A simple obligation has one active subject (creditor) and one passive subject (debtor), whereas a composite obligation involves multiple subjects or multiple objects. Composite obligations can further be categorized as cumulative (conjunctive 'and') or alternative (disjunctive 'or').

What is the role of the 'devedor' in an obligation of uncertain things, and how does it impact the creditor?

In an obligation to give an uncertain thing, the debtor is responsible for determining the specific item to be delivered. Once this choice is made, the obligation is considered one of giving a specific thing. If the uncertain thing is lost before the choice, the creditor may request a replacement, as the thing is not yet individualized.

What is the concept of 'obligation of means' versus 'obligation of result'?

An obligation of result requires the debtor to achieve a specific outcome or result, such as a surgeon performing a successful operation. An obligation of means, on the other hand, obligates the debtor to apply the best possible efforts and expertise to achieve a goal, but does not guarantee the result, such as a lawyer working on a case.

How does the concept of 'obligation of doing' differentiate between fungible and non-fungible obligations?

An obligation of doing can be either fungible or non-fungible. A fungible obligation can be performed by any person, while a non-fungible obligation is personal and must be performed by the debtor themselves. The latter is often referred to as a 'personal obligation' and cannot be transferred to others.