The central idea came due to professional activity. Observing in the day by day the
difficulty of those who, unconformed with an act practiced in the phase of execution
of a labour process, don’t find, with the desired security, an adequated judicial
providence to submit the appreciation of such act to a college decision. Appeal
against judgment is suitable, in a period of 8 (eight) days, from the Judge’s or
President’s decisions, in the executions. This is what says the specific legislation.
One serious problem in the interpretation of this command is to know what are
“decisions” taken in the laboural execution, which can be refuted through appeal
against judgment. This problematic is found inside a whole processual context, and
that’s why we had to follow an outline starting by basic notions of process as
instrument used by the State for the exercise of its jurisdictional function. From
general to particular, we got into labour process and its phases, attaching to the
execution one, how it begins and finishes. The main issue is the reaction to the
execution, the reactionning means, specially the appeal as a consequence of the
principle of double level of jurisdiction, being or not a constitutional guarantee.
According to legal prevision, such appeal is the appeal against judgment. We talk
about it and about the acts which the judge can practice in labour execution, saying
the nature of each one of them. We also talk about interlocutory decisions,
registering our worry with the difficulty we have in identifying them, mainly in the
phase of execution. In the final part of this work, we deal with the question of
possibility or not of using appeal against interlocutory decision, illustrating this study
with some examples based on real cases and the solutions given to each of them.
|
