Processo Civil- Concurso Escrevente 2023 TJSP- Aula 75- Recursos

Summary

This lecture discusses the concept of 'embargos de declaração' (embargoes for clarification) in legal proceedings, explaining their purpose to address obscurities, contradictions, omissions, or material errors in judicial decisions. It emphasizes the importance of thorough judicial reasoning, where a judge must justify their decisions by applying legal norms specifically to the case at hand. The lecture also highlights the relevance of the Civil Procedure Code, particularly Article 489, which stresses that a decision lacking adequate justification is legally insufficient, reinforcing the necessity for transparency in the judicial process.

Takeaways

• 😀 Embargos de declaração is a versatile legal remedy in Brazilian civil law, often referred to as a 'joker' resource due to its broad applicability.
• 😀 It can be used in situations like clarifying obscurities, eliminating contradictions, or correcting material errors in judicial decisions.
• 😀 One key purpose of embargos de declaração is to address decisions that are unclear or vague (obscurity), requiring clarification from the judge.
• 😀 Embargos de declaração can also resolve contradictions in a decision, where the judge’s statements conflict with each other.
• 😀 If a judge fails to address important issues or arguments raised during the case (omission), embargos de declaração can be filed to compel the judge to address them.
• 😀 The remedy is also used to correct material errors, such as clerical mistakes or incorrect facts in the judgment (e.g., wrong names).
• 😀 The *parágrafo único* in the law emphasizes that if a decision fails to consider precedents or important issues, it is considered to have omitted critical elements.
• 😀 Article 489 of the CPC requires judicial decisions to be well-founded, meaning they must include clear explanations and apply legal concepts directly to the case at hand.
• 😀 Judicial decisions are not considered properly justified if they simply quote legal texts or concepts without linking them to the specifics of the case.
• 😀 Transparency and accountability in the judiciary are crucial, as all parties involved must have the right to understand and potentially challenge the reasoning behind a decision.

Q & A

What is the significance of 'pacta sunt servanda' in legal proceedings?

'Pacta sunt servanda' is a Latin phrase that means 'agreements must be kept.' It signifies the legal principle that contracts must be honored. In legal contexts, this principle is vital for ensuring that judicial decisions are consistent with the terms of agreements made between parties.

Why must a judge explain the reasoning behind their decision?

In a democratic legal system, a judge must justify their decisions to ensure transparency and fairness. This is important because the public, including the parties involved in the case, has the right to understand the reasoning behind judicial rulings, especially when they may wish to challenge them.

What does the phrase 'justificação do juiz' mean?

'Justificação do juiz' refers to the need for a judge to provide justification or a clear explanation for their decision in a case. This is crucial to ensure that all parties understand the basis of the judgment and can exercise their rights, such as appealing, if necessary.

What happens if a judge fails to explain the reasoning behind a decision?

If a judge does not provide an explanation or justification for their decision, the ruling may be considered invalid or improperly grounded. This could lead to an appeal or other legal remedies, as the affected parties would not be able to adequately challenge or understand the decision.

Why is it important for judicial decisions to be based on specific, relatable legal concepts?

Judicial decisions must be based on clear and relevant legal principles. Using vague or indeterminate terms without connection to the case undermines the integrity of the judgment. It can lead to confusion, a lack of accountability, and hinder the ability of parties to understand or challenge the decision effectively.

What is the role of appeals in ensuring accountability of judicial decisions?

Appeals serve as a mechanism for reviewing and potentially overturning judicial decisions. If a party disagrees with a decision, they can appeal to a higher court, which helps ensure that decisions are well-reasoned, justified, and consistent with legal standards.

Can a judge simply state 'the law says so' without providing a deeper explanation?

No, a judge cannot simply state 'the law says so' without providing a reasoned explanation. In a democratic legal system, judges must offer specific reasoning and apply legal principles appropriately to the facts of the case. This ensures fairness and transparency in the judicial process.

What does it mean for a ruling to be 'not well-founded'?

A ruling is considered 'not well-founded' if it lacks sufficient reasoning or explanation, making it unclear how the legal principles were applied. This could be due to the use of vague or unrelated legal terms, or the failure to address all the relevant issues in the case.

What is the relationship between a judge's decision and the public's right to control that decision?

In a democratic system, the public, particularly those directly involved in a case, has the right to challenge or control a judge's decision. This is done through appeals or other legal remedies, ensuring that decisions are not arbitrary and that the judicial system remains accountable.

What is the purpose of providing a 'clear justification' in judicial decisions?

The purpose of providing a clear justification is to ensure that the decision is transparent, comprehensible, and can be subjected to review if necessary. It helps safeguard the integrity of the judicial process by ensuring that decisions are based on sound reasoning and legal principles.