Produção antecipada de prova pré-arbitral quando desvinculada da urgência

Abstract

This present work aims to analyze the possibility of early production of evidence in pre-arbitral contexts when the requirement of urgency is absent. The early production of evidence, provided for in Articles 381 to 383 of the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure, introduces the concept of "autonomous right to evidence," allowing the acquisition of evidence without the need to prove the existence of periculum in mora (risk of harm), facilitating a better understanding of the facts for filing a lawsuit or resolving the dispute through self-composition. In parallel, in the field of arbitration, Article 22-A of Law No. 9.307/1996 provides for the possibility of cooperation between judges and arbitrators for granting precautionary or urgent measures, but it does not address other situations regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure. In this context, there are ongoing debates regarding the early production of evidence, especially in cases where urgency is absent, raising questions about the role of the Judiciary and the Arbitral Tribunal. The study examines the relationship between these institutions, the application of precautionary measures, and jurisdictional competence in arbitration, exploring different doctrinal and jurisprudential positions