English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Sustenta-se, com fundamento no art. 5o, XXXV, da Constituicao (inafastabilidade do controle jurisdicional), que o juiz nao pode deixar de julgar uma causa que lhe foi submetida (proibicao de juizos de non liquet). O proposito deste artigo e discutir essa proposicao a partir da teoria dos direitos fundamentais. Pretende-se demonstrar: (i) que a inafastabilidade do controle jurisdicional tem caracteristica de principio, o que impoe sua aplicacao de acordo com as possibilidades faticas e juridicas subjacentes; (ii) que a Constituicao nao veda de forma absoluta o non liquet e que ele pode ser valido, em circunstâncias excepcionais, para ampliar o dialogo institucional; e (iii) que o enquadramento do art. 5o, XXXV, como principio traz importantes consequencias praticas. The non liquet prohibition and the non-obviation of judiciary jurisdiction principle Based on the provisions of Article 5, XXXV, of Brazilian Constitution (non-obviation of judiciary jurisdiction), some believe a judge cannot refrain from judging a claim presented to judiciary (prohibition of non liquet). The purpose of this article is to discuss such proposition, based on the Theory of Fundamental Rights. Its purpose is to demonstrate (i) that such constitutional provision contain characteristic of principles, imposing that such provisions be applied in accordance with the legal and factual possibilities; (ii) that the Constitution does not entirely forbid judges to declare non liquet, accepted in exceptional circumstances to enhance the institutional dialogue and (iii) such understanding of Article 5, XXXV as a principle has several important consequences.

A proibição do non liquet e o princípio da inafastabilidade do controle jurisdicional