More on res judicata (Brazil) and what the judge asked of GDSI
The judge asked them to submit a status report specific to damages they feel entitled to and their efforts to obtain such information. One deposition by Rontan is hardly sufficient to solely base what you seek in damages from. Especially if you feel it is being minimized by the individual being deposed. Pretty standard order for a hearing on damages.
You might be interested in this from the Brazilian Constitution.
Article 5, XXXVI, of the Federal Constitution applies to each and every infra-constitutional legislation, no distinction being made whether it be a public or a private law or if it be a mandatory or facultative provision. Indeed, as in Brazil, the principle of respect to vested rights, perfect juridical acts and res judicata is of a constitutional nature, no exception being made to any type of ordinary legislation, the argument presented by many – influenced by the law of the countries in which the provision is set forth in the ordinary legislation -makes no sense that public policy legislation is immediately applied, affecting the future effects of the perfect juridical act or of the res judicata, and that is why, if the effects are altered, it is obvious that changes in the case are being introduced, which is prohibited by the constitution.
Summarized. This basically says that any Final Judgement, res judicata, is the law no matter where it was made and that nothing can automatically change that ruling. Recognition of a final ruling may not be denied on the grounds of Public policy or law for it is prohibited by the constitution.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
