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 Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper examines the decision of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) that attributed competence to the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) to adjudicate complaints against decisions made by Small Claim Courts of Civil Procedure. In its judgment, the Supreme Court decided that, while the legislator does not create the court to uniform Jurisprudence of these Courts, the Superior Court of Justice shall exercise jurisdiction over the complaints to control the identity of the decision rendered by the appellate divisions of the Small Claim Courts of Civil Procedure and the jurisprudence of Superior Court. Two hypotheses are handled aiming to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of this Complaint: the first raises the possibility of the Supreme Court render unconstitutional decisions; the other is the formal and material unconstitutionality of STJ Resolution No. 12/2009, issued to regulate the procedure of the Complaint within the STJ. Both lead to the conclusion that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the system of the Small Claim Courts of Civil Procedure.

Reclamação ao STJ de decisões proferidas pelos Juizados Especiais Cíveis estaduais: quis custodiet ipsos custodes?