Legislator Case Law & Legislation
0272/06 AI generated

Clarification of judgment denied when applicant claims only error in legal interpretation, not obscurity or ambiguity.

Case Number 0272/06
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the request for clarification of the second-instance judgment. The applicant argued that the decision incorrectly interpreted and applied a specific legal provision rather than claiming the text was unclear or ambiguous. The court ruled that since the applicant failed to demonstrate obscurity, unintelligibility, or genuine ambiguity in the judgment's reasoning, the procedural remedy for clarification was not applicable.

Legislator headnote

Official

ACLARAÇÃO DE ACÓRDÃO AMBIGUIDADE OBSCURIDADE

Keywords

AI generated
clarification of judgment legal ambiguity unintelligible reasoning interpretation error procedural remedy second instance court administrative litigation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
CPC 1996, Art. 669, n.º 1
CPC 1996, Art. 716

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

[AREA TEMATICA 1] DIR ADM CONT - ACTO.

[AREA TEMATICA 2] DIR PROC CIV.

[LEGISLACAO NACIONAL] CPC96 ART669 N1 A ART716

[DATA DE ENTRADA] 03/17/2006

[Nº CONVENCIONAL] JSTA00064267

[Nº DO DOCUMENTO] SA1200706060272

[OBJECTO] AC 1 SUBSECÇÃO DO CA.

[RECORRENTE] A...

[RECORRIDO 1] CONSELHO DE ADMINISTRAÇÃO DO (IFADAP)

[URL] https://www.dgsi.pt/jsta.nsf/35fbbbf22e1bb1e680256f8e003ea931/033488490AF9CFD1802572FF0049D37C?OpenDocument

SUMÁRIO

I - O pedido de aclaração tem cabimento sempre que algum trecho essencial da sentença ou acórdão seja obscuro (por ser ininteligível o pensamento do julgador) ou ambíguo (por comportar dois ou mais sentidos distintos).

II - Assim, deve ser indeferido o pedido de aclaração de acórdão, ao qual o requerente não imputa qualquer obscuridade, ininteligibilidade ou ambiguidade, alegando, apenas, que o mesmo fez incorrecta interpretação e aplicação de determinado preceito legal.