| Summary: | The article aims to address the underutilization of the repetitive claims resolution incident in the Brazilian Judiciary, even after 7 years since the creation of the institute. The research focused on the reasons for not admitting the incidents. An empirical jurisprudential analysis, quantitative and qualitative, of the Court of Justice of the Federal District and Territories (TJDFT) was made, carrying out a cross-sectional analytical study of the demands related to the theme, in order to present an "argumentative radiography" of the judgments of the said Court. In the end, it was possible to observe the difficulty of fulfilling the legal requirements (art. 976 of the Code of Civil Procedure), especially considering that most repetitive cases within the scope of the Judiciary Power require factual analysis, even without the need for probative instruction, which makes it impossible to admit the IRDR. In addition, it concluded that the parties are still trying to use the IRDR as an appeal substitute, after failing to succeed in the appeal, seeking, a posteriori, standardization with the understanding of another Civil Chamber.
|
|---|