This project is ongoing. Descriptions, methods and results may be updated after further validation.
Educational and informational content. It is not legal advice, guidance for a specific case or an institutional position. Examples and analyses use only legitimate sources and public data, aggregated or properly anonymised.
Research question
When does the STJ agree to review the quantum of moral damages, and how does Súmula 7 act as a barrier to that review?
Motivation
The STJ says it only reviews awards that are "derisory or exorbitant", but the line between re-examining facts (barred by Súmula 7) and a question of law is drawn case by case. Mapping that line with data shows what the rule does in practice.
Data
- Metadata and texts of Superior Court of Justice decisions on moral damages
Methodology
- Census and sampling of decisions; structured classification of grounds
- Models for the probability of admitting the appeal and of revising the amount
Limitations
- The decision annotation protocol is still under validation.
Implications
- Evidence on the role of appellate filters in harmonising awards.
Planned applied products (possible outreach, subject to registration)
- Annotated dataset of STJ decisions on quantum review (after validation)