The term arrazoado (legal argumentation) designates the written and reasoned exposition of facts and legal grounds presented by parties in a judicial proceeding, possessing the legal nature of a postulatory and argumentative procedural act. Essentially linked to Procedural Law (Civil, Criminal, Labor, and Administrative), the arrazoado embodies the principle of dialectics, allowing the litigant to challenge decisions or support claims through a critical confrontation of the legal grounds applicable to the dispute.
1. Definition, Concept, and Legal Nature
In the legal lexicon, the arrazoado (often used in the plural, arrazoados) refers to the set of logical and legal arguments that support a procedural document. It is not to be confused with a simple request (petition), but constitutes its indispensable foundation. Its legal nature is that of a procedural act of the parties, of a cognitive-argumentative character, intended to influence the formation of the magistrate's or the collegiate body's conviction.
Doctrinally, the arrazoado is the externalization of the right of action and defense under the prism of substantiation. While the request is the immediate object, the arrazoado is the causa petendi (cause of action) or the appellate grounds. Within the courts, the term is strictly associated with "reasons" and "counter-reasons," documents in which the error of the appealed decision is demonstrated (error in procedendo or error in iudicando).
2. Historical Evolution and Comparative Law
The genesis of the arrazoado dates back to Roman Law, specifically in the period of cognitio extra ordinem, where writing began to prevail over orality. In Portuguese Law, the Philippine Ordinances already provided for the need for parties to "reason" (arrazoar) their cases before the judges, a term derived from the Latin ad rationem (according to reason).
In Brazil, the evolution of the institute followed the transition from the system of strict legality to the system of rational persuasion. In the Civil Procedure Codes of 1939 and 1973, the arrazoado was seen as a rigid formality. With the advent of the 2015 CPC and the constitutionalization of the process, the arrazoado assumed a democratic function: the duty of debate. In Comparative Law, it bears symmetry with the brief of the Common Law system and the alegaciones of Spanish Law, although in Brazil the requirement for analytical reasoning is more accentuated by the imposition of Art. 93, IX, of the Federal Constitution.
3. Legal Provision and Normative Framework
The arrazoado finds support in various legal statutes, being the backbone of the appellate procedure and final arguments:
- Federal Constitution: Art. 5, item LV (Principles of Adversarial Proceedings and Full Defense), which ensures the means and resources inherent to it.
- Civil Procedure Code (Law 13.105/2015):
- Art. 1.010, items II and III: Requires that the appeal contain the exposition of the fact and the law, as well as the reasons for the request for reform or declaration of nullity.
- Art. 1.021, §1: Imposes on the appellant the duty to specifically challenge the grounds of the appealed decision in the arrazoado of the Internal Appeal (Agravo Interno).
- Code of Criminal Procedure (Decree-Law 3.689/1941):
- Art. 600: Disciplines the deadline for the presentation of appeal reasons, allowing, even, for the arrazoado to be presented directly to the higher court (§4).
- Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT): Art. 893 et seq., which deal with appellate reasons in labor appeals, under the aegis of the principle of simplicity, but without dispensing with legal grounds.
4. Practical Application and Jurisprudential Understanding
The contemporary jurisprudence of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has consolidated the understanding that the arrazoado must observe the Principle of Dialectics. It is not enough for the party to express disagreement; it is imperative that the arrazoado attack, in a specific and detailed manner, all the grounds of the appealed decision.
STJ Precedent (Súmula) 182: "It is unfeasible to appeal under Art. 545 of the CPC that fails to specifically attack the grounds of the appealed decision." This understanding is applied extensively to all appeals. A generic arrazoado, which merely reproduces previous documents without engaging with the sentence or judgment, is considered deficient, leading to the non-admission of the appeal due to lack of formal regularity.
In the Superior Labor Court (TST), Precedent 422 reinforces that an appeal is not known if the appellant's reasons do not maintain relevance with the grounds of the appealed decision, highlighting the technical importance of the arrazoado for appellate admissibility.
5. Correlated Principles and Doctrinal Divergences
The institute of the arrazoado is governed by fundamental principles:
- Principle of Dialectics: Imposes symmetry between the grounds of the decision and the reasons for the appeal.
- Principle of Eventuality (or Consumptive Preclusion): The arrazoado must contain all matters of defense or attack at once, under penalty of preclusion.
- Principle of Primacy of Merits Judgment: Mitigates formal rigor, allowing that, in case of a curable defect in the arrazoado, the rapporteur may grant a deadline for correction (Art. 932, sole paragraph, CPC).
Doctrinal divergences arise regarding the extent of the causa petendi in the appellate arrazoado: the classical school defends the total prohibition of appellate innovation (ius novorum), while sectors of modern doctrine admit flexibility in cases of non-waivable rights or matters of public order that were not the subject of a previous arrazoado.
6. Contemporary Relevance and Impacts on the Legal System
In the era of electronic judicial proceedings (PJe), the arrazoado has acquired a new dimension. Argumentative density is confronted with the need for brevity. The use of Legal Design and Visual Law techniques in arrazoados has been the subject of academic debate, seeking to increase the effectiveness of legal communication without losing technical rigor.
The practical impact of a well-structured arrazoado is the guarantee that the Judiciary will address all arguments capable of, in theory, undermining the conclusion adopted (Art. 489, §1, IV, CPC). Deficient arrazoados overload higher courts with avoidable procedural incidents and harm the speed and effectiveness of the provision of justice.
Legal and Jurisprudential References
- BRAZIL. Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988. Brasília, DF.
- BRAZIL. Law No. 13.105, of March 16, 2015. Civil Procedure Code.
- BRAZIL. Decree-Law No. 3.689, of October 3, 1941. Code of Criminal Procedure.
- SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE. Precedent (Súmula) No. 182.
- SUPERIOR LABOR COURT. Precedent (Súmula) No. 422.
- STJ, AgInt in AREsp 2.100.000/SP, Rel. Min. Mauro Campbell Marques, Second Panel, judged in 2023.
