Name: PATRICIA DE ARRUDA PEREIRA
Publication date: 28/05/2020
Advisor:
Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| GILBERTO FACHETTI SILVESTRE | Advisor * |
Examining board:
| Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| GILBERTO FACHETTI SILVESTRE | Advisor * |
| TRÍCIA NAVARRO XAVIER CABRAL | Internal Examiner * |
Summary: This study had as object of analysis the application of the anticipatory procedural technique in the scope of the possessory demands. Based on the current Code of Civil Procedure, which brought together the normative discipline of tutelage based on vertically summary cognition (arts. 294 to 311), giving identity to the procedural instrument that acts against the damages resulting from the delay of the process, in order to make it faster, more effective and efficient, the performance and reflexes of this new regime of interim protection were examined in relation to its appropriateness in possessory claims and its adaptation to the procedure of possessory actions, in view of the presence of special procedural techniques that integrate the judicial protection of the jus possessionis. In the systematization of the anticipatory procedural technique, the main theoretical approach adopted was the theories of Luiz Guilherme Marinoni and Daniel Mitidiero. For the study of possessory protection, we sought to deepen the main problematic points and classic institutes of Civil Procedure that permeate the procedural protection of possession. Starting from the historical relationship between possession and early guardianship, and with the support of guidelines from the legal literature and jurisprudence, the characteristics of the preliminary injunction of the special procedure of possessory actions are analyzed, tracing their dogmatic profile, as well as the possibilities and advantages of the use of the various types of provisional injunction in the possessory procedure, in order to obtain the same practical result resulting from the possessory injunction, when dealing with old force, in addition to giving the jurisdiction the option of requesting the previous preliminary injunction, able to stabilize, as an alternative to the special new force rite. Facing the debate about the usefulness or not of maintaining the special procedure of possessory actions, it is further investigated whether the different procedural treatment fulfills the objective of attributing greater effectiveness, speed and security to the possessory jurisdictional protection, so that the suppression of techniques special damages would imply losses for an adequate jurisdictional protection of the jus possessionis.
