Relativização da coisa julgada: uma análise dos efeitos da declaração de inconstitucionalidade superveniente à sentença transitada em julgado e da ação rescisória prevista nos artigos 525, §15º, e 535, §8º, do CPC

Abstract

The present article analyzed the relativization of final and conclusive merit decisions through the hypothesis of rescission action foreseen in articles 525, §15, and 535, §8, of the CPC, aiming primarily to investigate the impacts and effects that the Supreme Federal Court's subsequent declaration of unconstitutionality exerts on res judicata. For this purpose, an examination of the res judicata institute was carried out, encompassing constitutional and infra-constitutional legislation, as well as doctrine and jurisprudence from Superior Courts, with emphasis on Supreme Court's General Repercussion Themes No. 881 and 885. Consequently, it was observed that the rescission based on the Supreme Federal Court's decision acknowledging the unconstitutionality of a law or normative act subsequent to the final judgment of the enforceable decision can lead to a situation of legal uncertaintyy particularly due to the starting point of the limitation period for its filing. This period is counted from the final judgment of the Supreme Court's decision, not according to the form outlined in Article 975 of the CPC. Consequently, the core issue of this study resides in the problematic nature of subsequent constitutional mutation established by the Supreme Federal Court and its impact on legal relations already protected by the authority of res judicata, which may jeopardize legal certainty and the legitimate trust of litigants in definitive judicial pronouncements.