The Supreme Federal Tribunal And The “General Repercussion” Requirement

The requirement that appeals to the Supreme Federal Tribunal (SFT) have a general repercussion was introduced by Constitutional Amendment 45/04, in the context of the recent reform of the Brazilian Judiciary, and is now found in articles 543-A and 543-B of the Code of Civil Procedure, added by Law 11,418/06.

The new criterion for admission of appeals to the SFT arises out of the SFT's jurisdiction, as Brazil's highest court, to protect and uphold the Federal Constitution. The concept of general repercussion is intended to ensure that only questions that are truly relevant to Brazilian society are heard by the court, improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the SFT's work by excluding appeals that reflect only the unsuccessful party's unwillingness to accept defeat. The requirement of general repercussion thus delimits the scope of the SFT's general jurisdiction to ensure the constitutionality of state action, since its specific jurisdiction is already defined by the exhaustive list of entities that may bring actions for a declaration of unconstitutionality in art. 103 of the Federal Constitution.

The requirement of general repercussion differs from both the petition for a writ of certiorari adopted by the Supreme Court of the United States and the former Argument on Relevance imposed under Amendment no. 3 to the SFT's Rules. The difference lies in the fact that while certiorari and the Argument on Relevance require the appellant to show the relevance of the issue under appeal, the court may deny leave without giving reasons for its decision. In the case of general repercussion, the STF is bound by article 93(IX) of the Federal Constitution, which requires that all judicial decisions must be supported by reasons, on pain of nullity.

Under articles 543-A and B of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court must consider the importance of the case from an economic, political, social and legal point of view in determining whether it meets the requirement of general repercussion, and appeals that have a general repercussion in any one of these aspects will meet the requirement. Furthermore, the appellant must demonstrate that the questions raised in the appeal transcend the interests of the parties, and have an impact that goes beyond the confines of the particular case, as required under art. 322 of the SFT's Rules.

Although the elements that demonstrate the general repercussion of a case are subjective in nature, both the legal literature and...