NOGUEIRA, C. O. R.; http://lattes.cnpq.br/7963618845530331; NOGUEIRA, Cícero Oberdan Rodrigues.
Resumo:
With the prohibition of the exercise of self-protection, the state became responsible for
resolving contentious issues arising within communities. No doubt that the national power by
the State brought a number of benefits to the parties involved. However, with the passage of
time and the increased demands, a true arising crisis arose from the difficulty of providing an
appropriate and satisfactory by courts. In response to this crisis, honoring him access to
justice, the forecast of creation of Special Courts arises: first, in the State Court, and only then
in the sphere of the Federal Court. Characterized by a series of peculiar principles, the
establishment of Special Courts represented real revolution in the implementation of access to
justice postulate, especially for the lower social classes. In fact, the only analysis of the set of
principles ruler of this new legal system, it is possible to see its importance. In the words of
the Constitution itself, the procedure of these Courts should be essentially oral and
accelerated, in order that it can be assured to all who need an effective and swift justice. Still,
certain constitutional guarantees of the process should be preserved and prestigious also in the
Special Courts system, specifically in the Civil, the present study object. In this vein is that
looms in importance respect to the dual degree in Law constant jurisdiction of the State
Courts. In fact, the State Civil Courts, in obedience to express constitutional law, the Act
provides for the possibility to appeal against the sentences, traditionally called unnamed
feature, which should be enjoyed by a group formed by three appellate judges robins
headquarters of the Juvenile Court itself . Interestingly, the Act that established the Small
Claims Courts under the Federal Court only provided for the possibility of the final judgments
resource, ie, those in which there are meritorious analysis, considering appealed those
extinguishing process without resolution of merit. However, this prediction, as put in the
literalness of the legal device, can not persist, especially when one has in mind the
constitutional principle of double jurisdiction. Also, I would add that there is no absolute
principles, so that the best solution only accurate analysis of each case could prove, since,
when no knowledge of the resource may involve denial of jurisdiction, the claimants should
be the franchisee drive of appellate proceedings also in the Special Courts Federal Civil