Como operacionalizar a desjudicialização dos processos de usucapiãoprojeto piloto na comarca de Virginópolis-MG

Resumo

This study seeks to investigate extrajudicial adverse possession, as established by article 216-A of Law nº 6.015/73, introduced and modified by Laws nº 13.105/15 and 13.465/17. The National Council of Justice clarified the procedure through Provision nº 149/2023 and state regulated it according to local standards. The research aims to elucidate the criteria for the utilization of evidence and procedural acts between the judicial and extrajudicial spheres. The case study was conducted in Virginópolis-MG, where a pilot project was implemented to operationalize the transition and utilization of procedural acts between the two spheres. The aim was to encourage dejudicialization and provide a more efficient and economical resolution of adverse possession demands. The research thoroughly explores the obstacles and advantages related to the transition of adverse possession cases between judicial spheres, such as the lack of essential documents and the culture of judicialization. The dejudicialization project is analyzed through judicial indicators and real estate registry statistics. The dissertation also explores the possibilities of performing acts at the notary office simultaneously, such as edicts and notifications. Additionally, it analyzes what constitutes "indispensable documents to propose the action", as described in arts. 320 of the CPC/15 and 283 of the CPC/73 and discusses the inapplicability of the principle of tempus regit actum in establishing which are the necessary documents to propose the action. The work shows that the adoption of instruction criteria like those of the real estate notary for the judicial process can deter parties from resorting to judicialization due to the proven efficiency of the notary office. Parties may, in certain cases, give up the judicial action in favor of the extrajudicial process, provided there is no pending dispute to be resolved. It is recommended that the Judiciary grant the gratuity of justice only when necessary and adopt the instruction criteria of art. 216-A of Law nº 6.015/73 and of Provision nº. 149/2023 when assessing the initial petition, to prevent new lawsuits, decrease the backlog, and reduce the processing time of adverse possession judicial actions. The data collected for this work was obtained from books and registry records, the website of the Judiciary statistics of Minas Gerais (TJMG), and the National Council of Justice (CNJ), allowing a clear mapping of the problem and the results after the project's implementation. The analysis of legislation, jurisprudence, doctrine, and relevant academic works reveals the multidisciplinary nature of the research. The final aim is to validate the best practices adopted in the county, identify limitations, indicate necessary precautions, and propose lege ferenda changes in Provision nº. 149/2023 of the CNJ.

Ficha do documento

Tipo

Dissertação

Ano

2024

Instituição

Fundação Getulio Vargas

Fonte

Repositório da FGV

Idioma

Português

Acesso

Acesso aberto

Identificador

oai:repositorio.fgv.br:10438/36759

Temas

Dados

Palavras-chave

Usucapião extrajudicialLei nº 6.015/73DesjudicializaçãoVirginópolis-MGProcedimentos JudiciaisRegistros imobiliáriosDocumentos indispensáveisProvimento nº 149/2023 do Conselho Nacional de JustiçaExtrajudicial Adverse PossessionLaw nº 6.015/73DejudicializationJudicial proceduresReal estate recordsIndispensable documentsProvision nº 149/2023 of the National Council of JusticeDireitoResolução de disputas (Direito)UsucapiãoRegistro de imóveisDireito civil