A aplicação da prescrição intercorrente no processo do trabalho

Abstract

This article aims to analyze the intstitute of intercurrent prescription in the Brazilian labor process. Such an institute, without a doubt, is one of the most controversial. This was because there were no legal regulations and two overlaps consubstatiate diametrically opposed understandings. On the one hand, Precedent nº. 327 of the Federal Supreme Court categorically admitting the possibility of intercurrent prescription in the labor court; on the other hand, Precedent nº. 114 of the Superior Labor Court, according to which the said institute is not applicable to the Labor Court. Thus, in the work in question, starting from this controversy, the different positions of the doctrine are analyzed and the diverse judicial decisions on the subject are investigated. It occours that, with the Labor Reform approved on July 13, 2017, was inserted in the CLT Article 11-A, which establishes the possibility of applying the intercurrent prescription in the labor process. However, given the peculiarities of the Labor Court, such a device must be analyzed with care. One of the principles that govern Labor Law is the protective principle, which recognizes the de facto inequality among the subjects of the legal labor relationship and, therefore, promotes the attenuation of the economic, hierarchical and intellectual inferiority of the workers. In addition, a great part of the labor funds postulated in the Specialized Court is of alimentary nature. Thus, it is necessary to have two requirements for the application of said institute: unequivocal knowledge of the party or his attorney of the order or decision rendered and action that depends exclusively on the party.