Supreme Court raises unconstitutionality appeal

[soyeb19]

For this reason, it follows that the purpose pursued by the legislator when introducing appeals against appeal sentences had to be, at least in part, different. Historically, appeals against these sentences have been allowed. It is an extraordinary resource, originated during the French Revolution, with the objective of guaranteeing compliance with the laws emanating from the Assembly, which represents national sovereignty. Originally, cassation had a political function: to guarantee the correct application of laws by lower courts, preventing them from becoming creators of norms, ignoring those emanating from the legislative power. Therefore, cassation, originally, had the function of protecting substantive laws, rather than protecting the interests of the specific litigant, but rather the objective defense of legality.


In any case, at the time of drafting the Civil Procedure Law of 2000, the situation of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court was one of Whatsapp Database absolute collapse due to overload of work. The consequence was that none of the three objectives pursued by the appeal could be achieved with a minimum of reasonableness.


To alleviate this situation, the Civil Procedure Law of 2000 designed a system of appeals against sentences handed down in the second instance that sought to strengthen the role of the Supreme Court as a creator of jurisprudence and defender of substantive legality. To achieve this, it was necessary to relieve the Supreme Court of a significant part of its workload , for which part of the previous powers of the Supreme Court were transferred to the Superior Courts of Justice.





In order to achieve the proposed objective, the Civil Procedure Law opted for the creation of a duality of resources against second instance sentences, designed as alternative and exclusive remedies, and attributed to different jurisdictional bodies. On the one hand, the extraordinary appeal for procedural infringement was created , which would be heard by the Civil and Criminal Chambers of the Superior Courts of Justice. Through this resource, sentences handed down on appeal by the Provincial Courts could be appealed when it was considered that they had incurred procedural infractions. On the other hand, the appeal subsisted , which was filed before the First Chamber of the Supreme Court and, for matters on regional Civil Law, before the Superior Courts of Justice, being reserved to challenge the appeal rulings when the violation of substantive norms.

[TBustah!]

Chain this brat up in my robot factory!