Contrarrazões do recurso de apelação no Novo Código de Processo Civil: natureza de reconvenção ou de um recurso dulpamente subordinado?

Abstract

This work has as general objective to investigate the scope of the content of the impugnation in the face of appeals contradictions in the Civil Procedure Code of 2015, whether of counterclaim or double subordinate appeal. As specific objectives, clarify the NCPC guidelines close to the main objective, with particular emphasis on deforming; to establish the legal evolution of the principle of correspondence regarding appeal and grievance by instrument, together with the respective judicial pronouncements and to investigate, in the general appeal theory, institutes with a direct connection in the analysis of the proposed general objective, such as species of interest appeal, and the principle of recursional uniqueness. The method used for the development of this work was a dialectical approach. As for the concrete attitudes required for research, that is, the methods of procedure, the comparative method was used when considering the doctrinal divergences listed previously, without forgetting the historical context, due to the necessary contextualizations pointed out in the specific objectives. It was concluded that it is the current of doctrine that best conforms to the New Code of Civil Procedure is the one that defends that the contrarrazões to the appeal of appeal, according to art. 1009, §1, of the CPC of 2015, has the nature of a double subordinate remedy, that is to say, it has subordination to the principal appeal by virtue of a public interest subordinate to the knowledge of the appellant's appeal that is inherent in the subordinate remedies whose species are the adhesive resource and the subordinate appeal). The second subordination refers to the main appeal, that is to say, in order to analyze the allegations deducted in the balance of contrarrazões, the main appeal must be provided giving the recognition of a conjectural or postponed recursal interest, since it arose only with the provision of an appeal brought by the applicant, in view of the principle of the prohibition of reformatio in peius, of the unilaterality or unipersality of the appeal and of the express observance of the adhesive remedy in the national system.