BRAZIL Law and Practice Contributed by: Maria Augusta Rost and Ricardo Barretto, Fenelon Barretto Rost
8.3 Live Evidence and Cross- Examination
reflects the principle of non-exclusion of judicial review, meaning that individuals are not required to exhaust administrative remedies before seek - ing legal action to enforce their rights. However, it is generally advisable to first pursue administrative channels, provided there is a rea - sonable chance that the government will grant the requested right. If the request is denied or if government has already established a position contrary to the applicant’s interests, the right to seek judicial intervention is considered estab - lished. 9.3 Time Limits The Brazilian legal system provides a wide range of judicial actions that can be brought against the government. These actions are subject to various filing deadlines, which may be set by specific laws or established through judicial precedent. As a general rule, the deadline for challenging government acts is five years. However, depend - ing on the nature of the claim and the relief sought, this period may vary. For example, a writ of mandamus must be filed within 120 days from the date of the contested act. In some cases, there is no time limit for filing a lawsuit. For instance, actions seeking reim - bursement of public funds due to government impropriety have been deemed imprescriptible by the Federal Supreme Court. Likewise, there is no deadline for filing a habeas corpus – a consti - tutional remedy that protects individual freedom in cases where a person is illegally detained or faces a threat to their liberty due to abuse of power or an unlawful act.
As a general rule, depending on the nature of the case, live evidence may be used as evidence in judicial proceedings. People give evidence under oath, as perjury is a criminal offence in Brazil. Cross-examination was introduced with the enactment of Law 13,105/2015, which amended the Civil Procedure Code. 9. Time Limits and Preliminary Steps 9.1 Preliminary Requirements As a general rule, individuals can access the judiciary at any time without first having to pur - sue administrative remedies. However, in some cases – such as claims related to the social security system – the courts have ruled that the claimant must first exhaust administrative channels before seeking judicial intervention, typically after a denial of their requested right. This requirement may also apply in other areas where sector-specific government bodies are designated to resolve disputes. The Civil Procedure Code also provides for prior judicial interpellation, a mechanism that allows an individual to formally notify another person to take or cease a certain action that they believe is their legal right. The interpellation request is submitted to a judge, who forwards it to the respondent, though the respondent is not obliged to reply. However, this procedure is neither mandatory nor a prerequisite for filing a lawsuit. 9.2 Exhausting Internal Appeals Article 5, Item XXXV of the Federal Constitution states that “the law shall not exclude from judi- cial review any injury or threat to a right” . This
50
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook