Prova unilateral: conceito, admissibilidade e valoração

Abstract

The present thesis deals with the legal-evidential phenomenon of unilateral evidence. The research made use of a bibliographical review of books and articles, national and foreign, as well as a jurisprudential survey with analysis of the cases and respective comparison, carrying out a cyclic trajectory between conceptual and normative abstraction and the richness and concreteness revealed by the casuistry. The general objective consisted in recognizing the general lines of the problem of unilateral evidence and in providing theoretical subsidies that could contribute to a clearer and safer operation and, therefore, more fruitful. Once the assumptions were established in a first chapter, the problem of understanding the concept of unilateral evidence was faced and, in the absence of a legal, doctrinal and jurisprudential definition, a concept of unilateral proof was chosen as a working hypothesis. Afterwards, the challenges related to its admissibility and valuation were faced, asking the reasons why unilateral evidence deserves greater or lesser esteem, either by virtue of norms that give it prestige, or by the absence of the occurrence of factual assumptions that would give rise to its scarce credibility. In this line, the principles of the integrity of the legal spheres, nemo sibi titulum constituit and nullus testis in re sua were presented and examined, revealing the close connection between the material and procedural aspects of the subject of this thesis. Then, quite common cases involving the problem of unilateral evidence were analyzed. Finally, in a concluding chapter, dogmatic parameters were established for the use of unilateral evidence, as well as an exercise of its applicability through the evidentiary valuation of Pero Vaz de Caminha's Letter. Thus, factors that can contribute to the practice of using the unilateral evidence were explained