RESCISSORY ACTION AND ITS NULLIFYING EFFECTS ON RES JUDICATA FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE OF RES JUDICATA

Abstract

The article deals with the analysis of the legislative material conflict between the constitutional principle of res judicata and rescissory action. Thus, there is the possibility of disestablishing a decision protected by the constitutional principle of res judicata through rescissory action. This legal measure is used to challenge the flaws in a decision that has become final. The proposed objective is to determine whether rescissory action and its nullifying effects on res judicata material violate the constitutional principle of res judicata. To this end, a deductive method is employed, and as a research tool, bibliographic and documentary exploratory techniques are used. This allows for an examination and analysis of the application of rescissory action in the face of the constitutional principle of res judicata, considering the contradiction found, as res judicata material signifies the end of the appellate phase, providing a status of immutability, protected by a constitutional principle, while rescissory action rescinds a final decision, with a stable procedural security character. It is concluded that the applicability of rescissory action arises from procedural irregularities or the presentation of new essential evidence that could not, for justified reasons, have been presented previously, thereby ensuring the democratization of law and the full application of justice, without the presence of procedural blemishes, leading to the mobilization of justice.