As medidas atípicas do artigo 139, IV do CPC/15 uma breve análise jurisprudencial
Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Data
2022-06
Tipo de documento
Artigo Científico
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Área do conhecimento
Ciências Sociais Aplicadas
Modalidade de acesso
Acesso aberto
Editora
Autores
Alvarez, Lucas Gonzalez
Orientador
Cunha, Guilherme Antunes da
Coorientador
Resumo
O artigo 139, IV do Código de Processo Civil de 2015 dá ao magistrado de possibilidade de, na direção dos atos processuais, determinar todas as medidas indutivas, coercitivas, mandamentais ou sub-rogatórias necessárias para assegurar o cumprimento de ordem judicial. Sete anos após sua edição, ainda são diversas as discussões acerca de sua aplicação e seus limites, razão pela qual se propõe realizar análise quanto ao estado das chamadas “Medidas executivas Atípicas” no atual contexto judiciário brasileiro. Para tanto, iniciou-se uma análise bibliográfica para se conceituar e compreender a prestação jurisdicional, bem como os princípios que regem o processo Executivo e as medidas que visam a satisfação do crédito. Assim, seguiu-se para uma exposição dos tópicos mais debatidos em meio aos Tribunais Brasileiros, onde constatou-se uma grande resistência dos tribunais em relação à matéria, concluindo que, mesmo após anos de sua vigência e com diversos parâmetros traçados, o tema das medidas atípicas encontra-se estagnado, com demandas sendo decididas de forma repetitiva e de forma rasa.
Article 139, IV of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code gives the magistrate the possibility, in the direction of procedural acts, to determine all inductive, coercive, mandatory or subrogatory measures necessary to ensure compliance with a court order. Seven years after its edition, there are still several discussions about its application and its limits, which is why it proposes to carry out an analysis regarding the state of the so-called "Atypical executive measures" in the current Brazilian judicial context. Therefore, a bibliographic analysis was started to conceptualize and understand the jurisdictional provision, as well as the principles that govern the Executive process and the measures aimed at satisfying the credit. Thus, it was followed by an exposition of the most debated topics in the midst of the Brazilian Courts, where there was a great resistance of the courts in relation to the matter, concluding that, even after years of its validity and with different parameters traced, the theme of atypical measures is stagnant, with demands being decided in a repetitive and shallow way
Article 139, IV of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code gives the magistrate the possibility, in the direction of procedural acts, to determine all inductive, coercive, mandatory or subrogatory measures necessary to ensure compliance with a court order. Seven years after its edition, there are still several discussions about its application and its limits, which is why it proposes to carry out an analysis regarding the state of the so-called "Atypical executive measures" in the current Brazilian judicial context. Therefore, a bibliographic analysis was started to conceptualize and understand the jurisdictional provision, as well as the principles that govern the Executive process and the measures aimed at satisfying the credit. Thus, it was followed by an exposition of the most debated topics in the midst of the Brazilian Courts, where there was a great resistance of the courts in relation to the matter, concluding that, even after years of its validity and with different parameters traced, the theme of atypical measures is stagnant, with demands being decided in a repetitive and shallow way
Palavras-chave
Atipicidade, Medidas executivas, Prestações pecuniárias, Diretrizes