Counterclaim and Counter-Request in Brazilian Civil Procedure

critical perspectives

Abstract

The article analyzes whether denominating “reconvenção” (counterclaim) as “pedido contraposto” (counter-request) in Brazilian civil procedure obstructs its regular processing. The issue stems from the interpretation of institutes from distinct Civil Procedure Codes (CPC/2015 and CPC/1973), generating debates in the courts. The objective is to verify if the nomenclature causes procedural impediments. The justification lies in the necessity to discuss these institutes, which are subjects of recent judicial controversies. The methodology employed was qualitative, applied, and exploratory research, based on bibliographic and documentary review, focusing on the analysis of jurisprudence from the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) and State Courts of Justice, in addition to academic articles. The results demonstrate that the STJ, in REsp 1.940.016, reformed a ruling by the TJPR, deciding that the error in denomination does not prevent the defendant's claim from proceeding. The STJ prioritized the reasonable duration of the process and procedural economy, understanding that the essence of the request was preserved. Although the jurisprudence is divergent, the STJ's decision is viewed as coherent with the Brazilian legal system and the evaluative formalism, combating excessive formalism and guaranteeing due process as a fundamental right.