O princípio da congruência no direito processual contemporâneo: da tradição à transformação

Abstract

This dissertation undertakes a comprehensive examination of the principle, rule, or dogma of procedural congruence, charting its development from its classical underpinnings to its potential transformation within the framework of Brazilian civil procedure, particularly in the wake of the enactment of the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The analysis is anchored in the dialectic between tradition and transformation, with the central inquiry being whether the principle of congruence retains its normative essence or demands reinterpretation in response to the evolving demands of contemporary procedural justice. Rooted in traditional maxims such as sententia debet esse conformis libello and ne eat judex ultra petita partium, Brazilian procedural orthodoxy has historically mandated a strict correspondence between the relief claimed and the judgment rendered. However, the normative and axiological reconfiguration introduced by the 2015 CPC—emphasizing effectiveness of jurisdiction, due process, and access to justice—raises the hypothesis that procedural congruence must be reconceived in light of these constitutional and systemic values. The thesis unfolds in four chapters: (i) a historical and dogmatic reconstruction of the principle of congruence, tracing its roots from Roman law through to the 1973 CPC; (ii) a comparative analysis of the treatment of congruence in both civil law and common law jurisdictions; (iii) a theoretical delimitation of the procedural object, grounded in the doctrine of triple identity; and (iv) a doctrinal and jurisprudential inquiry into congruence, focusing on elements such as claims, parties, evidence, and res judicata. Methodologically, the research combines historical reconstruction, normative and doctrinal analysis, and jurisprudential survey, establishing a critical dialogue between classical legal theory and the demands of a democratic and effective procedural system. The scope of the inquiry is confined to the horizontal dimension of procedural congruence in civil proceedings, deliberately excluding appellate mechanisms, binding precedents, and other autonomous procedural domains, such as criminal, labor, or administrative law. In conclusion, the dissertation seeks to determine whether the principle of congruence remains tenable in its traditional formulation or whether it must be reconceptualized in order to align with the constitutional principles and procedural paradigms of a modern democratic state governed by the rule of law—preserving its normative core while ensuring its functional adaptability within the contemporary legal order