A aplicação dos meios executivos coercitivos atípicos para satisfação da obrigação pecuniária

Abstract

Since the enactment of the Federal Constitution of 1988, the Civil Procedural has been adjusted with the objective of giving effect to the fundamental rights. This paper seeks to identify the reasons why ideals and liberal dispositions which praise the formalism, were giving place for procedural flexibility. It tries to identify and demonstrate some effects of this flexibilization, using as an example the extension of the powers of the judge, who, after the advent of the New Code of Civil Procedure, began to play a more active role in the search for effective solutions to the litigation. Among the extensions of these powers, the magistrate under the terms of article 139, IV of the CPC may determine all coercive measures necessary to ensure compliance with the judicial order, including actions for pecuniary benefit purposes. Based on this scenario, it will be analyzed whether these measures have reached their main (and constitutional) objective of effectiveness, or if they have proved to be innocuous. In the same way, it will be observed that such innovations should not be used arbitrarily, without observing the rights of the debtor, and must adhere to the principles of proportionality and reasonableness