The interrelation between the Justice Courts of the Southeastern region and the Superior Courts on appeals of the Incident of Resolution of Repetitive Demands: a study of the systemic integrity

• Grant number: 22/15465-8
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Scientific Initiation
• Start date: April 01, 2023
• End date: March 31, 2024
• Field of knowledge: Applied Social Sciences - Law - Private Law
• Principal Investigator: Camilo Zufelato
• Grantee: Victor Azevedo de Aragão
• Host Institution: Faculdade de Direito de Ribeirão Preto (FDRP). Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Ribeirão Preto , SP, Brazil

Abstract

The repetitive litigation has presented several challenges for civil procedural law science. With annual increase of the number of trials taken to appreciation of the Judicial Power, the traditional procedural meanings have proven not to be effective enough in dealing with this phenomenon. The Incident of Resolution of Repetitive Demands (IRRD) emerges as one of the most peculiar tools of the Civil Procedure Code of 2015 in order to provide, within a context of repetitive litigation, isonomy and legal security in decisions which judge the same law question that repeats itself, hence providing jurisprudential uniformity within a certain scope. The IRRD achieves that through fixation of a law thesis which ought to be applied to all trial judgments that contain the same controversy. Since this thesis is uttered through Court judgments, it is subject to appealing, that is, special appeal and extraordinary appeal, according to article 987 of Civil Procedure Code. On the interrelation between State Courts of the Southeast region and Superior Courts concerning the admissibility and the judgment of the appeals of IRRD, there is an opacity which hinders the verification of the isonomy principle in this scope, so that is not clear if there is an uniformity of understandings on the judgment of these appeals, whether it is about the admissibility or the judgment. Hence, this study aims to mitigate this opacity, intending to verify to what extent the principle of isonomy is materialized through uniformity of legal decisions on judgments of IRRD appeal in order to offer a whole and cohesive jurisdiction.