| dc.description.abstract | The present work has the purpose to analyze the possibility of the cognitive split and the
decisionary fractionation in the common process, considering the positivity brought from the Code
of Civil procedure from 2015, upon the insertion of the articles 354 paragraph 356. The focus of
this research is the constructive concepcion of the necessary requirements so the decisionary
fractionation can be possible, which the criterias for possibility upon a complex process, either by
the plurality of requests or the plurality of parts, culminating in a group of juridical relations that
must be solved on the decision. Even though the cognitive split is not something new in the
procedural ordering, it is new how open and positive the clause is in the common procedure, which
before was delegated to the speciality of the specific procedures for the possibilitation of the
cognitive split and the decisory fractionation. The possibility of a procedure be split into this
decision making aspect needs a diversity of requirements, which are delimited as the problem of the
present work, in order to build a relationship between the objective complexity of the demand and
the existence of the plurality of questions, in fact, in it’s partial solvability and the maintenance of
issues that can only be solved after a specific probative instruction. For the present research, the
methodology adopted is the deductive, through a literature review on the subject, in an overview of
the institutes related to the theme, like a contentious object of the procedure, cause of claim,
request, compilation of requests, judicial decision, chapters of the sentence, judicial cognition and
demand merits of the claim, in order to deductively construct a specific result about the proposed
problem. After studying those institutes and reviewing the literature, the construction of the
problem’s answer emerges through analysis over the formative aspects of the procedure objectively
complex, the development toward the uniqueness of the sentence as a rule and the positive
possibility to the decisory fractionation through a cognitive split. There is still a constructive
analysis of the possibility of fulfilling the requirements for a decisive relationship, the inviability in
some situations, the material hypotheses and the way the decision is constructed, it can be with or
without merit, through the parts attitudes - the plaintiff and the defendant - and the judgment in a
necessary cognitive perception about the existence of cognitive bifurcation demand. It is important
to show that the confrontation about the appeal challenge of a non fulfillment of the requirements
for the decisory fractionation and the impact of an eventual appeal, as well as the judgmental partial
and the consequences of the proper decision and the rest of the demand that has lis pendens. The
conclusion shows that the existence of the necessary requirements for this cognitive split and the
decisory fractionation, with a necessary relation to the plurality of questions of fact, partial
resolvability in the face of objectively complex judicial protection. | eng |
