Abstract
[This chapter was drafted prior to the final change of the law, but its analysis is nonetheless a great contribution to our understanding of the dynamism of civil procedure. Indeed, the fact that the law changed during the editing process (in the manner proposed and discussed below) is itself relevant to readers' appreciation of the dynamism of civil procedure around the world - editors note]This article deals with something very new in Brazilian law, a new Civil Procedure Code (2015). This chapter focuses on the new rule that determines that res judicata covers not only the decisum but also its reasons. This law is not typical of civil law systems, but the author believes it will produce good results, as it leads to efficiency.
Professor, Ph.D. and Master of Laws at PUC-SP.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
According to Brazilian Law, res judicata means the impossibility of changing a final judicial decision. In slightly different forms, this is an international concept, derived from Roman Law.
- 2.
A concept similar but not identical to “cause of action”. What is important to say here is that the essence of these legal phenomena is exactly the same.
- 3.
These two opinions are deeply studied by Sérgio Gilberto Porto, Coisa julgada civil. 4.ª ed. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, p. 82–83.
- 4.
Vide: SILVA, Ovídio Baptista da. Limites objetivos da coisa julgada no atual direito brasileiro, in RePro, v. 15, p. 45, April/1979; BARBOSA MOREIRA, José Carlos. Ainda e sempre a coisa julgada, in Doutrinas essenciais de processo civil, v. 6, p. 679, October/2011.
- 5.
ARAGÂO, Egas Moniz de, Sent ença e coisa julgada: exegese do Código de Processo Civil. Rio de Janeiro: AIDE, 1992, p. 242.
- 6.
The “Vorfragen” are the issues that a judge must decide before judging the merits of the claim (the main issue – Hauptsache – fond du litige). A judge would be unable to solve the main issue (defined by the claimant) without firstly having decided on the “Vorfragen”. In other words, “Vorfragen” are issues which must be resolved before the principal issue, because their resolution indicates how the merits will be decided.
- 7.
WAMBIER, Teresa Arruda Alvim. A sentença e a coisa julgada, in RePro, v. 41, p. 177, janeiro/1986.
- 8.
It is interesting to remark that these contradictions exist on a theoretical level, not in the practical world.
- 9.
DINAMARCO, Cândido. Instituições de direito processual civil, p. 543.
Principaliter: as the main object.
- 10.
Incidenter tantum is the opposite of principaliter.
- 11.
TALAMINI, Eduardo. Coisa julgada e sua revisão, p. 82, and: ARAGÃO, Egas Moniz. Sentença e coisa julgada, p. 247.
- 12.
Chiovenda always said that the role of civil procedure is to render concrete the State’s will (CHIOVENDA, Giuseppe. Instituições de direito processual civil. V. 1. Campinas: Bookseller, 1998, p. 18–19). The decisum is therefore considered an expression of the legislator’s will and it is directly related to the civil law res judicata doctrine.
- 13.
Knowledge, cognizance.
- 14.
ARAGÃO, Egas Moniz de. Sentença e coisa julgada, p. 256–257.
- 15.
GRINOVER, Ada Pellegrini. Ação declaratória incidental. São Paulo: RT, 1972, p. 41–46.
- 16.
DALLA BONTÀ, Silvana, Una benefica inquietudine. “Note comparate in tema di oggetto del giudicato nella giurisprudenza alla luce delle tesi zeuneriane”, Eine “heilsame Unruhe”. Rechtsvergleichende Anmerkungen zur Bestimmung der objektiven Grenzen der Rechtskraft in der jüngeren Rechtsprechung im Lichte der Thesen Zeuners, in ZZP, Zeitschrift für Zivilprozess, 125. Band. Heft 1–2012, p. 93 to 123. Certainly, this jurisprudence has nothing to do with the common law collateral estoppel or issue preclusion, but with ideas of Albrecht Zeuner, analyzed by Silvana Dalla Bontà, in this brilliant article.
- 17.
DALLA BONTÀ, Silvana, op. cit., p. 915, 6(b).
- 18.
SOARES, Marcos José Porto. O collateral estoppel no Brasil. In: RePro, v. 211, p. 115, setembro/2012.
- 19.
Commenting deeply on this problem in Spanish law, Cintia R. Guedes, A estabilização objetiva da demanda, Rio de Janeiro, 2012, not yet published.
- 20.
GIDI, TESHEINER e PRATES say that claim preclusion means that the claimant has to make all the petita in the same lawsuit. This is because this is the only possibility for him to do so (Limites objetivos da coisa julgada no projeto de Código de Processo Civil: reflexões inspiradas na experiência norte-americana. In: RePro, v. 194, p. 99, abril/2011).
- 21.
LOPES, Bruno Vasconcelos Carrilho. Limites objetivos e eficácia preclusiva da coisa julgada. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2012, p. 23–24.
- 22.
The party has to demonstrate the identity between the two claims, as explains Artur da Fonseca Martin (Coisa julgada nos Estados Unidos. In: RePro, v. 132, p. 75, fevereiro/2006).
- 23.
GIDI, Antonio; TESHEINER, José Maria e PRATES, Marília Zanella. Op. cit. Passim.
- 24.
LOPES, Bruno Vasconcelos Carrilho, op. cit.,, p. 37–38.
- 25.
ANDREWS, Neil. T he modern civil process: judicial and alternative forms of dispute resolution in England. 2ª ed. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 2011.
- 26.
Related not to the juicio verbal, but to the juicio ordinario.
- 27.
RAMOS, Manuel Ortells, Preclusións de Alegaciones y peticiones en la primera instancia, los procesos declarativos, in Cuadernos de Derecho Judicial, p. 15 a 69, especially p. 37.
- 28.
RAMOS, Manuel Ortells, op. cit., p. 66.
- 29.
Ramos Mendez, quoted by Joan Picó I Junoy, Los princípios del nuevo proceso civil español, in RePro, v. 103, p. 59, 2001.
- 30.
PICÓ I JUNOY, Joan, op. cit., p. 59.
- 31.
A provision that applies not only to class actions related to consumer law but also to other types of class actions. WAMBIER, Luiz Rodrigues. Sen tença civil: liquidação e cumprimento. 3ª ed. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 2006, p. 355.
- 32.
Fumus boni iuris: Decisions based on fumus boni iuris are preliminar and based on evidence of lower degree of persuasiveness. These decisions are subject to further and deeper analyses.
- 33.
DINAMARCO, Cândido. Instituições de direito processual civil, V. III, p. 770–772.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wambier, T.A.A. (2016). What is “Covered” by Res Judicata in Brazilian Civil Procedural Law: The Current Law and Perspectives of Change. In: Picker, C., Seidman, G. (eds) The Dynamism of Civil Procedure - Global Trends and Developments. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 48. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21981-3_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21981-3_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-21980-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-21981-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)