A FALTA DE CRITÉRIOS OBJETIVOS PARA A CONCESSÃO DE GRATUIDADE DE JUSTIÇA E A GARANTIA DE ACESSO À JUSTIÇA NO ÂMBITO DO PROCESSO CIVIL

Abstract

This paper analyzes the absence of objective criteria in the assessment of the financial insufficiency claimed by applicants for legal aid (gratuidade de justiça) in the Brazilian civil procedure, and the resulting impact of this gap on the constitutional principle of access to justice. Starting from the identification of financial insufficiency as the sole normative requirement for granting the benefit, the study highlights the divergence in judicial interpretation of the Civil Procedure Code and the legal uncertainty stemming from the wide discretion granted to judges. Through a descriptive research approach, based on jurisprudential analysis and literature review, the investigation aims to demonstrate the need for standardization of the criteria used to grant the benefit, as well as to present possible approaches for establishing such parameters. In this context, the study also considers the experience of other legal fields, such as Labor and Tax Law, where the adoption of objective standards has contributed to the rationalization of judicial activity. Furthermore, it analyzes the votes already cast in the ongoing judgment of Theme 1178 by the Superior Court of Justice and discusses the feasibility of setting such criteria. Ultimately, the paper concludes that establishing objective parameters is an essential measure to reduce legal uncertainty, enhance procedural efficiency, and ensure the effective delivery of justice.