Author(s) Andreia Filipa Loureiro Alexandre Martins
Advisor(s) Fernando Gravato Morais
Synopsis This dissertation focuses on the juridical regime of the PER, namely, on what regards numerous Problems that it raises and it’s Vicissitudes, having as central question understand in which way the change of the economics and social paradigm in Portugal, imposed the alteration of the legal normative that concerned to it. This simple bibliographic and jurisprudential review will allow, mainly, understand which way this Special Process of Revitalization is analysed by different Authors and, simultaneously, how it is applied in the daily Courts work and, percept if exists or not, consensus in its application in the same way that the referred regime was legally established and conjectured by our legislator. The study developed to the realization of this work, led us to concluded that PER, as an instrument of recovery of the debtor, if it’s shore that theoretically seems to present advantages, is still far to accomplish, in practice, it’s true goals and designs, culminating in manifestly unsatisfactory results. Regarding the doctrine, we understood, here and there, that the Authors differ on small points of the system, being, however, unanimous opinion that the Special Process of Revitalization it was created by the legislature in a hurry, with some lightness and without any systematization of concern, that drafted with too long standards, confusing and inconsistent, riddled with loopholes, and in some cases, difficult to get around and to fulfil its main purpose to produce a good decision. As for the analysed case law, we found that the Courts are divided and run over, especially, on the question of the personal scope of the PER, which shows, in our opinion, an inconsistency of the legal system and, shows a blatant unequal treatment towards debtors from different parts of the country, which, in our humble opinion, urges war.
See more here.