Ações possessórias : fundamento e pedido como instrumentos do transporte de técnicas processuais

Abstract

This dissertation aimed to analyze possessory actions from the perspective of the elements of cause of action and relief sought, with the objective of understanding how such elements relate to the transposition and adaptation of procedural techniques within the scope of the 2015 Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure (CPC/2015). This subject is closely linked to the area of concentration of the PPGDIR at UFES, particularly regarding of Existential and Patr ensuring the effectiveness of jurisdiction in contemporary contexts. The study stemmed from the question of how the techniques provided for the handling of possessory actions may be applied to other types of claims that do not have possession as their sole foundation, but which share certain objectives or procedural structures with them. The purpose of the investigation was to demonstrate that the enhancement of procedural techniques, as opposed to procedural rigidity, allows for greater flexibility and adaptability of procedural forms to the concrete needs of the parties, thereby enabling the transposition of such techniques to atypical or collective claims. The theory of procedural techniques was used as the structuring core of the analysis, with particular attention to the proposal of overcoming the dichotomy between actions and procedures, as well as to a constitutionally oriented interpretation of civil procedure. The dissertation was based on bibliographic review and dogmatic analysis of the current legislation, with emphasis on the provisions of the CPC/2015 concerning possessory actions, along with case law study. The research drew on classical and contemporary legal doctrine on possession and property, the main Brazilian procedural codes, decisions from higher courts, and relevant legislative materials. It was concluded that the special techniques provided for possessory proceedings such as the granting of preliminary injunctions based on summary cognition, mediation hearings in mass litigation, and the fungibility among possessory remedies may be understood as instruments that go beyond the restricted domain of typical possessory actions. The research argues that CPC/2015 introduced a logic of procedural flexibility centered on the effectiveness of rights protection, shifting the focus from procedural forms to procedural functions. Therefore, the transposition of procedural techniques from possessory actions to other claims constitutes a movement consistent with the principles of contemporary civil procedure, reaffirming the centrality of technique as an instrument for the realization of law and justice