This article aims to analyze the thesis that the application of the doctrine of precedent, originated in England, could reduce judicial litigation in Brazil, mainly in tax law procedures, such as tax enforcement. Brazil Law applies Civil Law, which means that the law is based on the principle of legality. However, the Brazilian Judiciary System is costly and has lower effectiveness. To deal with these problems, the National Congress has changed the law, providing mechanisms from the Common Law, mainly by introducing the binding precedents system. Respect for precedent is a requirement of the Brazilian Civil Procedure Code of 2015. However, the theory of precedent was developed in a society culturally very different from the Brazilian, which leads to the need for comparisons such as the exposed here that will justify the differences facing the source procedure that will undoubtedly occur. However, there are doubts if the transformation of the legal system will reduce the impressive figures of judicial cases. Nevertheless, the conclusion is definite. The precedent theory involves techniques that can potentially reduce tax lawsuits, representing a significant number of all legal disputes in Brazil. This conclusion was reached through data analysis, some doctrinal sources, and, mainly, by the author's reflections. This mix of scientific method verifies the hypothesis: describes and analyses the system and presents a definite conclusion.

O objetivo deste artigo é buscar compreender o que levou o Superior Tribunal de Justiça a não mais aplicar o estabelecido na Constituição Federal, que determina que cabe à lei complementar (i.e., ao Código Tributário Nacional) disciplinar a interrupção da prescrição do crédito tributário em relação à execução fiscal, e passar a aplicar, parcialmente, o Código de Processo Civil. A aplicação parcial da lei foi um movimento retórico, significando, em realidade, um afastamento do positivismo jurídico pela jurisprudência, sem fundamentação convincente. Em vista dessa conclusão parcial, o autor propõe levar em consideração, como um dos caminhos possíveis para a compreensão do ocorrido, a Sociologia Jurídica de Eugen Ehrlich. Para tanto, contrastou a mudança jurisprudencial com duas visões antagônicas do direito, que ficaram bem claras no debate entre Ehrlich e Hans Kelsen, para sustentar a hipótese de que a Corte se afastou do direito legislado, passando a aplicar um direito do grupo social (no caso, do próprio Tribunal).

The main purpose of this article is to make a brief historical analysis of the Brazilian Tax Law System, outlining the intricacies and setbacks through which it came to be formed today through the Federal Constitution of 1988. The foundations that support the Federative Republic of Brazil will be listed, mainly with regard to the Constitutional Tax Law: the republican principle, the principle of legality, the principle of federalism and the principle of the due legal process, without which the Brazilian Tax System would not be possible. Finally, the article demonstrates the necessary steps to become a researcher in Brazilian tax law colleges and institutes, showing the current academic stage in which they are, through the process of interdisciplinary openness and internationalization at the Pontifical Catholic University of Sao Paulo (PUC/SP). As a bibliographical methodology, we confronted classical books-from Professors Ruy Barbosa Nogueira, Geraldo Ataliba, to Roque Antonio Carrazza-specific statutes-as the Brazilian Constitution of 1988as well as new academic works developed at PUC/SP.

This article aimed to analyze, exclusively from the point of view of Law, whether or not the judicial precedents from the Brazilian higher courts are sufficient to deal with the problems related to the use of class actions for a writ of mandamus concerning tax matters. Faced with a negative answer, the authors sought a multidisciplinary approach and found in Political Philosophy elements to broaden the debate and find more robust solutions to the problems presented. The first part of this analysis focuses on the Brazilian Supreme Court of Justice, which prescribes that lawsuits for a writ of mandamus seeking to assert the right of the taxpayer to tax offset must be filed together with prima facie evidence that the taxpayer is entitled to receive a tax credit, although the credit amount itself is not discussed at this stage of the lawsuit. Then, our research turned to the analysis of whether or not the content of these precedents is compatible with the specificities of class actions claiming several rights affected by a common question of law. To do so, we looked into the nature of trade associations and entities’ extraordinary standing to sue by substitution, which is inherent to class actions for a writ of mandamus, and the need for the common aspects of the dispute to prevail over its individual aspects. Otherwise, the collective relief granted in such class actions would be ineffective. The methodology used was analytical, comparing general objectives (indicated by Political Philosophy) and specific objectives of the legal system (related to Law) with statues, jurisprudence and, mainly, precedents related to the theme. The conclusion of this analytical study between Law and Political Philosophy is that the limitations imposed by the judicial precedents from the Brazilian higher courts are not compatible with class actions for a writ of mandamus.