Jurisdição democrática, processos estruturais em litígios de direito privado e justiça multiportas

• Ano de defesa: 2021
• Autor(a) principal: Soares, Elisianne Campos de Melo
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte; Brasil; UFRN; PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM DIREITO
• Palavras-chave em Português: Direito Processual Civil; Jurisdição democrática; Justiça multiportas; Processos estruturais
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/46514

The structural injunctions represented a turning point in procedural law, as it brought the possibility of a gradual treatment of the demand, without the exhaustion of the sentence. Structuring measures aim to implement fundamental rights, implement certain public policies or resolve complex disputes, and are applied over time, through successive actions whose execution is closely monitored by the court. We can contribute to the decision-making process with the collaboration of the parties and others interested in resolving the demand, which, according to the procedural principle of cooperation, would be able to help the magistrate in the formation of more democratic and balanced decisions. In this task, the contribution of the Habermasian Theory of Communicative Action proves to be useful and fruitful. There has been common talk of structuring measures aimed at collective litigation. This work proposes a reflection on the possibility of its application to genuinely private demands. To this end, it outlines a brief overview of judicial activism, the history of the structural process and, later, talks about the movement of constitutionalization of civil law and the possibility of applying structural measures to judicial reorganization processes, possessory actions and to combat moral harassment within companies. Finally, it conceptualizes the means of self-composition of conflicts and proposes them as structuring techniques and tools for handling by the judge, effective in the democratic resolution of controversies, overcoming the classic procedural model of the sentence as a finalizing pronouncement of the litigation.