This master's thesis seeks to reflect on one of the assumptions of civil liability - the causal
link. In view of the current theoretical difficulty to solve complex problems, fruits of
contemporary relations, the objective of the work is to demonstrate that the assumption
of causality is faced in Brazilian doctrine and jurisprudence in a confusing way, especially
addressing three main theories - equivalence of conditions, adequate cause and direct and
immediate cause, elected and applied, without due coherence or justification, and also
that it is necessary to analyze the causal link within other possibilities besides those used
in the Courts. Thus, in order to answer the problem presented, the work offers new views
on the causal nexus, within punctuated foreign doctrines, as well as verifying the
application of the most usual theories in judges selected for their relevance to research.
For the construction of the master's thesis, the inductive method was used. It is concluded
that the jurisprudence is imprecise as to the use of the equivalence of conditions theory,
adequate cause and direct and immediate cause and that Brazilian doctrine already has,
in a timid way, alternatives for the analysis of the causal nexus that accompany the
tendency of foreign law and these are in accordance with constitutional principles,
producing a dialogue based on otherness, which may come to build more dignified
protection for the victim.
|
