Squatting or invasion of private land or property? The argumentative strategy of Judicial Power on decisions involving occupying land without legal claim
| Autor | Renata Helena Paganoto Moura, Alexandre de Castro Coura |
| Cargo | Pós-doutorado como visiting scholar na American University e visiting foreign judicial fellow no Centro Judiciário Federal em Washington D.C./Doutoranda em Direito pela Faculdade de Direito de Vitória |
| Páginas | 2098-2127 |
Revista de Direito da Cidade vol. 13, nº 4. ISSN 2317-7721
DOI: 10.12957/rdc.2021.52949
______________________________________________________________________
Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol. 13, nº 4. ISSN 2317-7721. pp.2098-2127 2098
SQUATTING OR INVASION OF PRIVATE LAND OR PROPERTY? THE ARGUMENTATIVE STRATEGY OF
JUDICIAL POWER ON DECISIONS INVOLVING OCCUPYING LAND WITHOUT LEGAL CLAIM
Alexandre de Castro Coura1
Renata Helena Paganoto Moura2
ABSTRACT
The objective of this paper was to fathom how many contradictory decisions about the outcome of the
same case are reached in a system of explicit rules. The dialectic method was used to approach
decisions previously selected by Purposive non-probability sampling concerning squatting of
abandoned properties. As a starting point for the dialectic bias, this study used the dissimilarity
between the theoretical common sense of legal experts and the critical knowledge by Warat, along
with his critique of the epistemology of concepts and the analysis of the syllogism by Katharina Sobota
as presentation style of the court decision. As a result, it was concluded that the theoretical common
sense of legal experts disguises strategies of speech. The decision is developed so as to convey a sense
of comprehensiveness and logical coherence, failing to disclose that what actually fuels the
interpretation of these actions is either the inflexible defense of a liberal property in which the owner
is the absolute master of the power legally assigned to him or the defense of the social function of the
estate. Despite many advances, the current political arena supports the upkeep of the former. Thus,
there is no consensus in the decision-making process of lawsuits about squatting private property: the
abandoned estate either “allows entrance” or “does not allow it”. The trespassers are either squatters
or occupants.
KEY WORDS: Squatting. Invasion. Estate. Abandoned property. Social function of the property.
INTRODUCTION
The judiciary has daily faced repossession actions in abandoned properties, or whose
abandonment is the main reason for the action. This type of action is not something recent and, even
1 Pós-doutorado como visiting scholar na American University e visiting foreign judicial fellow no Centro Judiciário
Federal em Washington D.C. Doutor e Mestre em Direito Constitucional pela Universidade Federal de Minas
Gerais (UFMG). Ex-professor efetivo de Direito material e process ual penal da Universidade Federal do Espírito
Santo (UFES). Professor de Teoria dos Direitos Fundamentais no Pro grama de Mestrado e Doutorado da
Faculdade de Direito de Vitória (FDV). Promotor de Justiça Cível da Comarca da Serra/ES (Patrimônio público e
defesa dos consumidores). Afiliação: Faculdade de Direito de Vitória (FDV) Lattes:
http://lattes.cnpq.br/5164681013190401. ORCID: h ttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7712-3306 E-mail: acastrocoura
@gmail.com
2 Doutoranda em Direito pela Faculdade de Direito de Vitória. Mestre em Processo Civil pela Pontifícia
Universidade Católica de São Paulo. Professora de Direito Civil da Faculdade de Direito de Vitória (FDV).
Advogada. Afiliação: Faculdade de Direito de Vitória (FDV) Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/6826515973212722.
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0676-1487 E-mail:renata@mediacaoeadvocacia. com.br
Revista de Direito da Cidade vol. 13, nº 4. ISSN 2317-7721
DOI: 10.12957/rdc.2021.52949
______________________________________________________________________
Revista de Direito da Cidade, vol. 13, nº 4. ISSN 2317-7721. pp.2098-2127 2099
in times of pandemic, many actions continued to be directed to the judiciary, seeking the repossession
of properties that are designated as – sometimes occupied, sometimes invaded. This dichotomy
between invasion and occupation reveals much more than it might seem.
This article seeks to understand how, in a system of explicit rules, there are so many
contradictory decisions about entering abandoned properties, and how the elaboration of the
expressions invasion versus. occupation and empty property versus. abandoned property, for the same
legal fact, demonstrate that, beyond from a logical conclusion, there is a discursive exercise to
rationally transform the decision. Even public and private property gains distinctions that are not found
in the text of the law, but which reinforce its political sense.
Accordingly, this work analyzes, in the first part, the pretension of the truth or the myth of the
scientificity of law and how this elaboration contributes to a decision model that hides its
contradictions; on the other hand, the second chapter demonstrates, through the analysis of judicial
decisions, how they are constructed to give a sense of completeness and logical coherence. Thus, what
property is, how it is guaranteed and who should be protected is what is often not explained in this
legal discourse.
Just to clarify, as this study does not intend to be an exhaustive analysis of decisions involving
this theme, the sampling procedure was used, as it “é uma parte essencial do procedimento científico3”
(BARROS; LEHFELD, 2005, p.57). Thus, in this study, non-probabilistic sampling was used, since, in this
case, “a chance de cada elemento da população ser incluído na amostra é desconhecida4” (MOURA;
FERREIRA; PAINE, 1998, p. 59). Because this study is based on a dialectical nature, the intentional non-
probabilistic sample was used, which occurs in cases where, “na opinião do pesquisador, tem, a priori,
as características específicas que ele deseja ver refletida na sua amostra5” (MOURA; FERREIRA; PAINE,
1998, p. 60).
Thus, the decisions to be analyzed will be designated as D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, D6 to m aintain a
uniform treatment of data throughout this work. Thus, there is a table which will include the case
number, the court and the designation to be used in the text.
DESIGNATION
PROCESS NUMBER
COURT|JUDGE OR RAPPORTEUR
D1
Civil Appeal No. 13217451
TJ/PR. Rapporteur: Fernando Paulino da
Silva Wolff Filho
D2
Innominate Appeal in Special Court No.
20040510087275
TJ/DF. Rapporteur: Judge João Batista
Teixeira
D3
Repossession Action No. 0045635-
59.2011.8.26.0053
TJ/SP. Judge Luís Fernando Camargo de
Barros Vidal
3 Is an essential part of the scientific procedure. (Free translation)
4 The chance of each element of the population being included in the s ample is unknown. (Free translation)
5 In the researcher's opinion, it has, a priori, the specific characteristics that he wants to see reflected in the
sample. (Free translation)
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO