Repetitive arguments regarding the admissibility of special appeals: the importance of distinguishing

The article " Repetitive rulings on the admissibility of special appeals: the importance of distinguishing ," authored by lawyer Caio Victor Ribeiro dos Santos , was published in the"Question of Law " column of Migalhas.

The text analyzes the Superior Court of Justice's (STJ) tendency to use repetitive appeals to decide on the admissibility of special appeals, questioning whether this is the opportune moment to adopt this practice.

The author distinguishes between Topic 1423/STJ, which deals with an admissibility requirement whose verification is independent of the examination of the merits (the inadmissibility of an appeal against a single-judge decision), and cases that actually raise concerns: those in which the conclusion of inadmissibility often presupposes the analysis of the very legal matter discussed in the appeal, as occurs, for example, in cases of application of Precedents No. 7/STJ, 284/STF and 83/STJ.

The author argues that the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) seems to be paving the way to admit, in practice, a kind of "binding application" of its precedents, by transforming their content into established legal principles under the repetitive appeals procedure.

It also argues that, without greater rigor in distinguishing, this practice tends to prematurely close access to the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) on relevant legal issues, and may even become unnecessary with the future implementation of the federal question relevance regime.

Access the full text .