| dc.description.abstract | Law 13.467 / 17 introduced in the Consolidation of Labor Laws the payment of attorney fees,
in the event of succumbence, under the terms of article 791-A. The objective of the research is
to analyze whether the mentioned institute (succumbence) is ruled or not of unconstitutionality,
in violation of the content of article 5, XXXV, of CF / 88 (access to justice), facing, therefore,
the substantive due process, which deals with the reasonableness and proportionality that
standards must have. To do so, we will discuss some guidelines that will guide the interpreter
in assessing this reasonableness and proportionality. Thus, we will analyze the degree of
effectiveness of the rule contained in article 5, XXXV, of CF / 88, showing its contained nature,
and which therefore admits restrictions in the infraconstitutional plan. We will also deal with
the legal framework that governs succumbential fees - subjective right of the lawyer with a food
nature - in the light of the principle of causality. Finally, we will analyze the hyposufficiency
and the principle of worker protection, highlighting the information and interpretive function
of this principle, which will result not in the impossibility of collecting fees due to the
succumbence, but in the way of fixing and demanding the funds. As a conclusion, comparing
all these variables, it will be seen that succumbence is a necessary and appropriate measure,
complying with the vectors of reasonableness and proportionality, thus not offending article 5,
XXXV, of the CF / 88. The developed research used the hypothetical-deductive method, with
a qualitative approach and bibliographic and documentary procedure. | eng |
