O incidente de resolução de demandas repetitivas: uma análise do seu cabimento nos Juizados Especiais Estaduais

Abstract

The present work aims to analyze the appropriateness of the establishment of the Repetitive Demands Resolution Incident (IRDR) in the Special State Courts, due to the New Code of Civil Procedure (NCPC) not having expressly foreseen or prohibited the referred incident establishment within the scope of the State Special Courts. Faced with such obscurity, the State Special Courts of each State in Brazil have chosen to use the IRDR or not, in a different way. The method used will be bibliographic review and document analysis. Initially, the general aspects of the IRDR will be explained, as concepts that explain its use, its requirements and its consequences, as well as how the incident came to materialize certain procedural principles, and not to violate them. Later on, an analysis of the IRDR will be made, relating it directly to the State Special Courts, showing which existing understandings would justify the impossibility of the establishment of IRDR in those courts, also demonstrating the independence and autonomy of the microsystem of the Special Courts, but that the arrival of IRDR in the NCPC came to exclude this autonomy of the microsystem, by express legal provision, without any unconstitutionality. Finally, the pros and cons of the establishment of the IRDR in the Special State Courts will be analyzed, defining that the establishment would be appropriate, as it is a binding tool for cases with an equal question of law in the same jurisdictional territory that would only ensure the effectiveness of the proceedings. State Courts, but observing the possible conflicts that may arise between IRDR judged by the Court of Appeals and IRDR judged by the Court of Justice, and the need to regulate the obscurities of the NCPC on the subject is also demonstrated so that all State Courts act in the same manner with regard to the standardization of jurisprudence.