Os m?todos autocompositivos e o exerc?cio de uma nova pol?tica jurisdicional : um olhar cr?tico a partir da audi?ncia do artigo 334 do c?digo de processo civil

• Ano de defesa: 2018
• Autor(a) principal: Damasceno, Marina
• Orientador(a): Macedo, Elaine Harzheim
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Direito
• Departamento: Escola de Direito
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Concilia??o; Media??o; Pol?tica Jurisdicional; Audi?ncia preliminar; C?digo de Processo Civil
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Conciliation; Conflict Mediation; Jurisdictional Policy; Preliminary Hearing; Civil Procedure Code
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/8180

The present dissertation aims to analyze the jurisdictional policies that assist in the construction of a consensus culture. In order to do so, it critically investigates the propositions used in the preliminary hearing of conciliation or mediation brought by the Civil Procedure Code of 2015 (CPC/15). From a deductive approach method, starting from the ideas related to the transformation occurred in the society and, consequently, going through the consolidation of new forms to regulate litigation ? adequate methods of conflicts resolution ? concluding with the analysis of the preliminary hearing that aims the reach of consensus, foreseen in article 334 of the CPC/15. It can be concluded that a culture of consensus is not achieved by imposing a legal device, but through policies that effectively encourage its application, which cannot be restricted solely to the Judiciary. Therefore, the preliminary hearing, in essence, is beneficial to the realization of a jurisdictional policy, once it allows a consensual dialogue before a statement of defense is offered. If critically considered the models exposed by the legislator, there is a distortion in its arguments, which in article 334 prioritize the reduction of numbers through a legal imposition, thereby becoming indifferent or even harmful its application, as it ends up being considered only a mere procedural step.