Legislator Case Law & Legislation
026249 AI generated

Clarification of a judgment under Art. 669(a) CPC67 is limited to formal defects and cannot correct errors of judgment.

Case Number 026249
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the claimant's request for clarification of the agreement, ruling that the procedural remedy under Article 669(a) of the Civil Procedure Code is strictly limited to eliminating formal imperfections. The parties argued that the original decision contained errors of judgment requiring correction, but the court held that such a remedy does not permit the addition of new elements or alteration of the verdict. Consequently, the court determined that the request exceeded the scope of the statutory provision and was therefore inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

Official

ACLARAÇÃO DE ACORDÃO ERRO DE JULGAMENTO

Keywords

AI generated
clarification of judgment errors of judgment formal imperfections Civil Procedure Code inadmissible request

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 669, alínea a), do Código de Processo Civil

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. [AREA TEMATICA 2] DIR PROC CIV. [LEGISLACAO NACIONAL] CPC67 ART669 A. [1ª PAG. DE PUBLICACAO DO ACORDAO] 424 [ANO DA PUBLICACAO] 90 [APENDICE] DR [DATA DE ENTRADA] 09/15/1988 [DATA DO APENDICE] 01/12/1995 [Nº CONVENCIONAL] JSTA00031320 [Nº DO DOCUMENTO] SA119900125026249 [OBJECTO] AC 1 SUBSECÇÃO DO CA. [PRIVACIDADE] 01 [RECORRENTE] MARTINS , MANUEL [RECORRIDO 1] CM DE FARO [URL] https://www.dgsi.pt/jsta.nsf/35fbbbf22e1bb1e680256f8e003ea931/0FE81DFAC192CCF4802568FC0037EB89?OpenDocument

SUMÁRIO

A providencia constante da alinea a) do artigo 669 do Codigo de Processo Civil visa apenas eliminar imperfeições formais da decisão, quer quanto ao veredicto, quer quanto aos seus fundamentos, que impossibilitem ou dificultem a sua inteligibilidade, que não aditar-lhe novos elementos ou alterar o julgado.

O meio proprio para a invocação de erros de julgamento não e, assim, o previsto naquela norma.*