PRECEDENTES OBRIGATÓRIOS E SEGURANÇA JURÍDICA: O IRDR NA UNIFORMIZAÇÃO DA JURISPRUDÊNCIA BRASILEIRA
PRECEDENTES OBRIGATÓRIOS E SEGURANÇA JURÍDICA: O IRDR NA UNIFORMIZAÇÃO DA JURISPRUDÊNCIA BRASILEIRA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22533/at.ed.668112527039
Palavras-chave: Coisa Julgada; Incidente de Resolução de Demandas Repetitivas. Precedentes Obrigatórios. Segurança Jurídica. Uniformização da Jurisprudência
Keywords: Res Judicata. Incident of Resolution of Repetitive Demands. Binding Precedents. Legal Certainty. Uniformization of Jurisprudence.
Abstract: This article analyzes the Incident of Resolution of Repetitive Demands (IRDR) within the Brazilian legal system, emphasizing its impact on the uniformization of jurisprudence, legal certainty, and procedural efficiency. The objective is to examine how the IRDR consolidates binding precedents and extends res judicata to third parties, promoting stability in legal relations. The research adopts a qualitative approach of a basic nature, with a bibliographic technical procedure to review existing literature and underpin the discussion. The results indicate that the IRDR creates decisions with the effectiveness of res judicata, applicable to pending and future cases, preventing the rediscussion of resolved legal issues. Moreover, the extension of res judicata to third parties is legitimized by adequate representation, ensuring the preservation of litigants' rights. The study compares the Brazilian institute to the concept of collateral estoppel in U.S. law, highlighting the relevance of due process and effective participation in judicial proceedings. It concludes that the IRDR is an essential tool for predictability and consistency in judicial decisions in Brazil. By integrating an effective procedural technique, the IRDR enhances efficiency in resolving repetitive demands and balances legal certainty with social justice. This study contributes to the understanding of the IRDR's role in the Brazilian legal system, offering relevant perspectives for the improvement of jurisprudence and the protection of fundamental rights.
- Dandara Christine Alves de Amorim
- Jair Lopes dos Santos Júnior