The proof of the second phase in labor law of the 43rd Examination of the (Brazilian Bar Association) generated dissatisfaction and protests between the candidates. Held on June 15 by (Getúlio Vargas Foundation), the assessment that enables bachelors in the right to exercise law has been questioned because of a response presented in the official template.
The statement of the question brought a hypothetical concrete case in which the client resorted to to annul a conviction and reverse the attachment of assets determined by a previous court decision. Candidates should interpret the facts and propose the correct legal solution.
In the second phase of the examination, the examined ones choose between specific areas such as civil law, criminal law, constitutional law, labor law, among others. The tests of this step have two sections. One is made up of four discursive questions, and the other, a statement that contains a concrete case. Each of these sections is worth five points, totaling ten.
Candidate approval depends on obtaining six points in total. If the procedural part appropriate for the specific case is eroded, the examination zero this part and is automatically eliminated. There is a possibility of a recap, without the need to go through the first phase again.
In the feedback of the evidence published by the FGV, the applicable defense for the case was a legal instrument called “pre-execution exception”, in which the party being charged raises questions that can be analyzed by the judge without the need for attachment, deposit or bail.
Candidates and experts, however, claim that the statement opened space for other pieces to be applied.
In social networks, several publications criticize the choice of the piece and the way the OAB and FGV have led the controversy. Among those who expressed themselves on the examination are the judge of the substitute at TRT-15 (Regional Labor Court of the 15th Region) Lucas Falasqui Cordeiro and the lawyer and professor of constitutional law Pedro Lenza.
Pablo Jamilk, a doctor of letters, a teacher of writing and candidate in the OAB examination, states that the main point of discussion is the guarantee of the court, which consists in the obligation to deposit judicially a amount charged to be able to question him in court.
“Throughout the statement, it is reaffirmed that the described person is hyposufficient [não possui recursos financeiros]. In this case, the need for warranty is dispensed, which enables the presentation of other pieces, “he says.
The Professor of Labor Law at the Faculty of Law of USP Flávio Roberto Batista also states that the statement made room for candidates to write petitions from other procedural classes beyond the exception of pre-execution.
“It is possible that the best professional even opt for the piece brought by FGV. The cabbio of another piece is part of the lives of lawyers, who choose which way to go from the problem presented by the client,” he says.
After the demonstrations, the FGV and the OAB issued a joint note on June 18 stating that the procedural part requested to the candidates was foreseen in the notice between the contents of procedural labor law.
The legal grounds cited, however, brought a jurisprudence published after the announcement of the examination of the exam. The theme 144, which deals with the exception of pre-execution, was tried by the TST (Superior Labor Court) in May, and the notice had been published in December 2024.
In addition, candidates have been informed that the bank will also accept the appeal of petition, an appeal that has an express provision in labor legislation and is appropriate against decisions given during the execution of a case.
For Jamilk, the notice prohibits this type of reasoning. According to an excerpt, the formulation of the exam questions must observe the pacified jurisprudence. He also argues that by increasing the scope of accepted pieces, the banking hurts the rules of the event.
According to the candidate, the announcement states that the correct response of the statement of the concrete case must contain only one legal piece. By increasing the number of parts, therefore, FGV would make room for the annulment of the issue and consequent distribution of points to candidates.
After a new wave of complaints, the OAB and FGV rectified the statement and removed the previous text from the air. This time, the reasoning of the choice of the play was based on articles of the Code of Civil Procedure, without mention of judgments. Sought, the institutions did not respond to the Sheet about what motivated the change.
Batista states that this is not the case of annulment of the issue and redistribution of the points. For the teacher, as the statement opens spaces for other types of legal pieces, the bank should include them to the official feedback.
“The issue speaks of the absence of reasoning of the decision that pledged the assets. In this case, there would also be other appeals, such as declaration embargo, for example,” he says.
The pattern of answers released so far is preliminary. The final feedback is scheduled for July 8, when the deadline for funds will also be opened.
