| dc.description.abstract | The essay is about the controversial figure of Judicial Activism, that is defined under a wide array of concepts, but here will be treated as the judiciary acting on the legislative and executive competencies, in conjunction with the civil responsibility of the state for unconstitutional omissions on the fundamental rights, especially with the one of the most relevant new consequences from the civil responsibility in its new figure, the assumed causal link. For this to happen, the first chapter will study the civil responsibility in a deep and thoughful manner, not only on its traditional and historical scope, but also with the contemporary events that unfold and change the law in a way that only judicial activism can bring an answer to it. The second chapter will bring all the concepts and positions about the judicial activism, besides define what is the concept that this essay will use. The essay ends with the idea that the judicial activism is necessary for the fulfilling of the fundamental rights, such as numerous authors had already advocated, but theres a wide array of guidelines created for it to be used in an adequated manner, like, being able to differentiate the probability judgement from the assumed causal link theory from the full risk theory from the state, the use of the theory of the efficient cause instead of the direct and immediate cause, and a bigger use of the judiciary self-restraint when the case in question brings a clash from fundamental rights. | en |
