THE SUBSIDIARITY OF ATYPICAL EXECUTIVE MEASURES IN CPC/2015

Abstract

The subsidiarity of atypical enforcement measures is a central topic in procedural law, particularly in the pursuit of a balance between effective enforcement and the protection of fundamental rights. These measures, provided for in Article 139, IV, of the CPC/15, should only be adopted when traditional alternatives, such as attachment and seizure, prove ineffective, respecting the principle of least onerous means for the debtor. The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) plays a crucial role in interpreting these measures, ensuring that their application does not violate rights such as contradictory proceedings and ample defense. This research analyzes whether atypical enforcement measures should be subsidiary to typical ones and how their application impacts the effectiveness of the enforcement process. The study is justified by the need for a critical debate on the efficiency of the judicial system, considering the challenges of enforcement without compromising the debtor's dignity and the legitimacy of judicial proceedings.