FERREIRA, R. B.; http://lattes.cnpq.br/3564665437985760; FERREIRA, Ribamar Batista.
Resumen:
This research intends to analyze the new law 14.181/21 (Law of Overindebtedness) in
light of the principles of the dignity of the human being and the existential minimum,
being justified, mainly, by the relevant legal and social interest of the theme. It has as
specific objectives the study of the historical context and the conceptualization of the
principles mentioned above, the analysis of the law of over-indebtedness and its
normative definitions, effects, notions and prevention. Still, it proceeds with the inquiry
regarding the regulation of the existential minimum based on judicial decisions and on
the history of existing debates about what is the minimum amount so that a life with
dignity may be preserved. In the same way, the problem is analyzed through the prism
of other pertinent legislations such as the Federal Constitution, the Consumer Defense
Code and the presidential decree 11.150/22. Furthermore, the present work uses as
methods of approach the deductive and qualitative models, while, in relation to the
objective and procedure, the exploratory and bibliographical models are glimpsed,
respectively. Furthermore, the exegetical-legal and the historical-evolutionary methods
are also used. Thus, the study made it possible to achieve the desired objectives,
because it allowed an exploration of the historical context of the problem, bringing up
its conceptions throughout time and according to different societies, in other times.
Besides, even though the conceptualization is abstract, it was possible to find a
definition for the existential minimum and for the dignity of the human being through
the presentation of a history of debates. Furthermore, the present study also reached
its purpose when doing a careful investigation of the Law of Over-indebtedness,
bringing its main characteristics and, equally, seeking the determination of a quantum
for the essential minimum based on judicial decisions. Finally, the presentation of
several decisions, regulations and data on the Brazilian reality of over-indebtedness is
emphasized, leading to the conclusion that even though there are regulations that
normatize the quantitative value of a minimum, the jurisprudence is contrary to
accepting this amount fixed in its judgments, essentially because it understands that
the amount is inferior and derisory for the maintenance of a minimally dignified life that
assures fundamental rights to individuals.