A responsabilidade pré-contratual: análise jurídica do rompimento das negociações no Brasil, na Alemanha e na Inglaterra
Carregando...
Data
2017-11-08
Autores
Nakamoto, Felipe Assis de Castro Alves
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
O presente trabalho tem como objetivo analisar as consequências jurídicas da responsabilidade pré-contratual, sobretudo aquelas decorrentes da ruptura de negociações. Para tanto, empregou-se a metodologia comparada, uma vez que a figura da responsabilidade pré-contratual é oriunda da Alemanha e lá também encontrou grande desenvolvimento. Como ponto de contraste, elegeu-se a análise do sistema jurídico inglês que, por conta de sua peculiaridade sistemática – common law – e por razões filosófico-econômicas não prevê a responsabilização por danos decorrentes do período negocial em uma figura unitária, tal como ocorre na Alemanha. No Brasil, a discussão centra-se na natureza jurídica e na divergência suscitada tanto pela doutrina quanto pela jurisprudência, fato de dificulta seu entendimento e impõe a superação de alguns conceitos clássicos, de modo a conformar o mundo jurídico à adequada proteção das relações sociais. Dessa forma, estribado na boa-fé objetiva, o Brasil desenvolve uma responsabilização pré-contratual distinta da Alemanha, com muitos traços de responsabilidade extracontratual. Espera-se, portanto, colaborar com o debate acerca de tão tumultuada figura que é a responsabilidade pré-contratual brasileira.
The objective of this study is to analyze the legal consequences of precontractual liability, especially those resulting from the rupture of negotiations. For this, the use of comparative methodology was employed, since the idea of precontractual responsibility comes from Germany and there found great development. As a point of contrast, we chose to analyze the English legal system which, because of its systematic peculiarity - common law - and for philosophical-economic reasons does not have a unitary remedy for damages stemming from liability on the negotiations period, such as occurs in Germany. In Brazil, the discussion focuses on the legal nature and divergence raised by both doctrine and jurisprudence, which makes difficult to understand the concept of precontractual liability and imposes the duty to overcome some classic concepts, in order to adapt the legal world to the adequate protection of social relations. Thus, based on objective good faith, Brazil develops a precontractual liability distinct from Germany, with many traits of extra-contractual liability. It is hoped, therefore, to cooperate with the debate about such a tumultuous solution which is the Brazilian precontractual liability.
The objective of this study is to analyze the legal consequences of precontractual liability, especially those resulting from the rupture of negotiations. For this, the use of comparative methodology was employed, since the idea of precontractual responsibility comes from Germany and there found great development. As a point of contrast, we chose to analyze the English legal system which, because of its systematic peculiarity - common law - and for philosophical-economic reasons does not have a unitary remedy for damages stemming from liability on the negotiations period, such as occurs in Germany. In Brazil, the discussion focuses on the legal nature and divergence raised by both doctrine and jurisprudence, which makes difficult to understand the concept of precontractual liability and imposes the duty to overcome some classic concepts, in order to adapt the legal world to the adequate protection of social relations. Thus, based on objective good faith, Brazil develops a precontractual liability distinct from Germany, with many traits of extra-contractual liability. It is hoped, therefore, to cooperate with the debate about such a tumultuous solution which is the Brazilian precontractual liability.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Responsabilidade pré-contratual, Boa-fé objetiva, Direito comparado, Precontractual liability, Objective good faith, Comparative law