Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
98P595 AI generated

Appeal dismissed; res judicata applies only to specific judgment terms, allowing separate connected cases to have different outcomes.

Case Number 98P595
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Justice dismissed the appeal regarding the scope of res judicata in criminal proceedings. The appellant argued that a prior judgment should preclude any further adjudication on the same facts. The court held that res judicata is strictly intraprocedural and limited to the precise terms of the original judgment, permitting separate judgments on connected cases under specific procedural articles.

Legislator headnote

Official

PROCESSO PENAL CASO JULGADO

Keywords

AI generated
res judicata scope criminal procedure connected cases separate judgments procedural limits intraprocedural effect judgment terms

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 673 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Art. 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code
Art. 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code
artigo 673 do CPC
Em processo penal, os efeitos do caso julgado são intraprocessuais, podendo ser apenas invocado nos precisos limites do artigo 673 do CPC: a sentença constitui caso julgado nos precisos termos em que julga.

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

[Nº CONVENCIONAL] JSTJ00035706

[Nº DO DOCUMENTO] SJ199810140005953

[PRIVACIDADE] 1

[TEXTO INTEGRAL] N

[URL] https://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/6FF7ACAF59445344802568FC003BA5F6?OpenDocument

SUMÁRIO

Em processo penal, os efeitos do caso julgado são intraprocessuais, podendo ser apenas invocado nos precisos limites do artigo 673 do CPC: a sentença constitui caso julgado nos precisos termos em que julga. Daí a possibilidade de haver respostas diferentes para os mesmos factos em casos de conexão cujo julgamento venha a ocorrer em separado, nos termos dos artigos 24 e 30 do CPP.