2017
DOI: 10.26668/indexlawjournals/2525-9679/2017.v3i2.2503
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: A promulgação da Lei Maria da Penha marca a retirada das demandas referentes à violência doméstica do paradigma conciliatório dos juizados especiais em que os delitos por ela albergados até então eram julgados. Por outro lado, a Resolução do Conselho Nacional de Justiça nº 125/2010 privilegia a utilização dos chamados meios alternativos para resolução de conflitos, iniciando uma nova perspectiva, a do privilégio à autocomposição. Por meio de uma revisão bibliográfica, investigou-se se a utilização da técnica d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…What is criticized in an edifying way is the fragility raised to the doctor on the procedural level, given that, in addition to the inversion of the burden of proof [54] still militates to the disadvantage of the physician the absence of full expert knowledge in judging the case and, in unfolding, the judge randomly judges against the expert report. The purpose of this study is a judgment chamber formed by medical specialists, members of the judiciary and members of civil society with remarkable knowledge about the matters that are quarreling in the process in order to provide the judge with greater technical scope and with the expertise to exercise the full defense principle of the doctor.…”
Section: Criticism Of Medical Error Processing and Judgment Formatmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…What is criticized in an edifying way is the fragility raised to the doctor on the procedural level, given that, in addition to the inversion of the burden of proof [54] still militates to the disadvantage of the physician the absence of full expert knowledge in judging the case and, in unfolding, the judge randomly judges against the expert report. The purpose of this study is a judgment chamber formed by medical specialists, members of the judiciary and members of civil society with remarkable knowledge about the matters that are quarreling in the process in order to provide the judge with greater technical scope and with the expertise to exercise the full defense principle of the doctor.…”
Section: Criticism Of Medical Error Processing and Judgment Formatmentioning
confidence: 99%