Limitation in labor enforcement / A prescrição na execução trabalhista

AUTOR(ES)
DATA DE PUBLICAÇÃO

2005

RESUMO

The text is mainly related to limitation (the juridical institution through which a plaintiff, in view of his/her inerce through the term granted by the law, loses the exigibility as to a given right) along the enforcing phase of a judicial labor procedure. The lesion to rights along a labor agreement provides with an objection through judicial action, aiming at the condemnation to the payment of the corresponding funds. Both the applications to be subject of action, or the subsequent enforcement, are subject to limitation, so that the holder of a right should perform the pertaining intentions, within the terms set forth for such. The enforcement of a judged matter can be understood generically as a procedural phase, and when the limitation occurs as the judicial action is developed, due to negligence by the plaintiff, it is named intercurrent. There is a controversy between Abstract No 327 from the Supreme Federal Court and Enunciation No 114 from the Superior Labor Court as to the incidence of intercurrent limitation in the judicial labor proceeding. The first one admits. The second, denies the aplicability. The compatibilization of said jurisprudencial Abstracts should be made by means of analysis of each concrete case The analysis on the theme, for conclusion support, has been made through the transmission of juridical concepts on constitutional guarantees to the right of action; to the judicial proceeding and the specific Labor law principles

ASSUNTO(S)

prescrição (direito) ação trabalhista judicial labor enunciation n. 114 abstract n. 327 súmula 327 direito do trabalho limitation enunciado 114

ACESSO AO ARTIGO

Documentos Relacionados