The Brazilian law, through the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure, introduced several changes regarding the early production of evidence. By expanding and flexibilizing the situations in which anticipatory proof is possible, the new legislation eliminates the exclusive precautionary nature of this procedure, thus giving rise to a new autonomous evidentiary action. This fact redefines the concept of evidence in Brazilian law, and this article aims to specifically analyze some aspects of the innovations introduced by the new Code, seeking to draw comparisons with the system of early production of evidence in Peru.

The Brazilian law, through the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure, introduced several changes regarding the early production of evidence. By expanding and flexibilizing the situations in which anticipatory proof is possible, the new legislation eliminates the exclusive precautionary nature of this procedure, thus giving rise to a new autonomous evidentiary action. This fact redefines the concept of evidence in Brazilian law, and this article aims to specifically analyze some aspects of the innovations introduced by the new Code, seeking to draw comparisons with the system of early production of evidence in Peru.

The purpose of this paper is offer to the reader, especially to the foreign reader, an overall picture of the res judicata en the Brazilian civil procedural law, with a special approach (not the only one) in the treatment to this topic by the Procedual Civil Code of 2015. The first part analyses a set of situaciones, quite peculiar actually, of the own authority of the res judicata along its shades; then, secondly, treats classical themes of the objective and subjective limits, and the peculiar regimen of the collective actions of the res judicata. Finally, the main is to analyze the overall profiles of the institute, without stopping in controversies or specifications regarding the perspective of the domestic law.

This article analyzes the so-called surprise-decision prohibition as a rule that follows from the due process of law and as an innovation of the Brazilian New Code of Civil Procedure 2015, observing its incidence. It concludes that this prohibition is part of the right of defense and therefore applicable without express legal prevision, as is the case of Peruvian law.

El artículo analiza la llamada prohibición de la decisión-sorpresacomo regla que deriva del principio de contradicción y en tanto innovacióndel Código Procesal Civil brasileño del año 2015, observando el plano desu incidencia. Llega a la conclusión de que tal prohibición es inherente ala previsión general del derecho de defensa y, por lo tanto, resulta aplicableprescindiendo de una disposición legal expresa, tal como en el caso delderecho peruano.

The purpose of this paper is offer to the reader, especially to the foreign reader, an overall picture of the res judicata en the Brazilian civil procedural law, with a special approach (not the only one) in the treatment to this topic by the Procedual Civil Code of 2015. The first part analyses a set of situaciones, quite peculiar actually, of the own authority of the res judicata along its shades; then, secondly, treats classical themes of the objective and subjective limits, and the peculiar regimen of the collective actions of the res judicata. Finally, the main is to analyze the overall profiles of the institute, without stopping in controversies or specifications regarding the perspective of the domestic law.

The Brazilian law, through the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure, introduced several changes regarding the early production of evidence. By expanding and flexibilizing the situations in which anticipatory proof is possible, the new legislation eliminates the exclusive precautionary nature of this procedure, thus giving rise to a new autonomous evidentiary action. This fact redefines the concept of evidence in Brazilian law, and this article aims to specifically analyze some aspects of the innovations introduced by the new Code, seeking to draw comparisons with the system of early production of evidence in Peru.

The purpose of this paper is offer to the reader, especially to the foreign reader, an overall picture of the res judicata en the Brazilian civil procedural law, with a special approach (not the only one) in the treatment to this topic by the Procedual Civil Code of 2015. The first part analyses a set of situaciones, quite peculiar actually, of the own authority of the res judicata along its shades; then, secondly, treats classical themes of the objective and subjective limits, and the peculiar regimen of the collective actions of the res judicata. Finally, the main is to analyze the overall profiles of the institute, without stopping in controversies or specifications regarding the perspective of the domestic law.

This article analyzes the so-called surprise-decision prohibition as a rule that follows from the due process of law and as an innovation of the Brazilian New Code of Civil Procedure 2015, observing its incidence. It concludes that this prohibition is part of the right of defense and therefore applicable without express legal prevision, as is the case of Peruvian law.

Con ocasión del IV Seminario Internacional de Derecho Procesal: Proceso y Constitución, IUS ET VERITAS logró reunir a tres destacados juristas internacionales expertos en el Derecho Procesal, los cuales nos dieron su propia perspectiva del concepto de tutela diferenciada. Con este aporte, se logró crear un interesante debate sobre la necesidad e importancia de un sistema que admita este concepto de tutela jurisdiccional. Asimismo, nos dieron un mayor entendimiento sobre las consecuencias que la llamada tutela diferenciada podría traer sobre otros derechos y garantías.

Con ocasión del IV Seminario Internacional de Derecho Procesal: Proceso y Constitución, IUS ET VERITAS logró reunir a tres destacados juristas internacionales expertos en el Derecho Procesal, los cuales nos dieron su propia perspectiva del concepto de tutela diferenciada. Con este aporte, se logró crear un interesante debate sobre la necesidad e importancia de un sistema que admita este concepto de tutela jurisdiccional. Asimismo, nos dieron un mayor entendimiento sobre las consecuencias que la llamada tutela diferenciada podría traer sobre otros derechos y garantías.

Con ocasión del IV Seminario Internacional de Derecho Procesal: Proceso y Constitución, IUS ET VERITAS logró reunir a tres destacados juristas internacionales expertos en el Derecho Procesal, los cuales nos dieron su propia perspectiva del concepto de tutela diferenciada. Con este aporte, se logró crear un interesante debate sobre la necesidad e importancia de un sistema que admita este concepto de tutela jurisdiccional. Asimismo, nos dieron un mayor entendimiento sobre las consecuencias que la llamada tutela diferenciada podría traer sobre otros derechos y garantías.