Some stand out that it would be incoherent to admit the anticipated guardianship against the Public Farm for the fact of the double degree necessary to not only be about plus a prerogative, but also because of the values that involve the reverse speed of the supposed demand. Still in the procedural scope, with the edition of already cited Law 9,494/97, which disciplines the concession of the guardianship in face of the Farm can affirm that the legal system started to admit the concession of the anticipated guardianship against the Public Farm, since the legal devices mentioned above had only started to restrict its application, where weighs the pointed obstacles above. In the practical one what we witness it is that the Public Farm using to advantage itself of the prerogative foreseen in article 475 has supported that the anticipation of the guardianship against itself is not possible, therefore the effectiveness of a provisions in this direction alone would occasion effect if the decision of the court below will be ratified by the eminently superior agency. Since already I want to externar my contrary position to this. Under this aspect I will cite the main favorable doutrinadores its concession. Being to first salutar to bring to the light meal the lesson of ours illustrious professor of Cssio Scarpinella Bueno 5: ' ' The rule of law only can lock up criterion of functional ability, in nothing inhibiting the concession of any measure against the Public Farm, under penalty, for the same reasons displayed throughout this work, of not being able to prevail for violating, in each in case that concrete, the ample access to justia.' ' Already for Luiz Guillermo Marinoni 6, the right that if applies to the particular one, also must be applied to the Public Farm, duly warned to authorize themselves, despite for it saw indirect, breaking to the rights of the citizen, as to follow consigned: ' ' (…) if the infraconstitutional legislator is obliged, on behalf of the constitucional law to the adjusted jurisdictional guardianship, to foresee guardianships that, acting internally in the procedure, allow to an effective and timely jurisdictional guardianship, it it cannot decide, in contradiction with the proper principle of the effectiveness, that the citizen only has right to the guardianship accomplishes and timely against the particular one.


Categories
Archives
- January 2023
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- October 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- December 2010