Talk:Law of Brazil

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Law Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Brazil: Government and laws Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Government and Laws of Brazil task force (assessed as Top-importance).

The article states:

Brazilian law derives from Portuguese civil law and is based on statutes and, partly and more recently, stare decisis.

If whoever edited stare decisis in actually refers to the recent súmula vinculante, I think that may give a wrong idea of how the Brazilian legal system works, even if the article does mention "partly." 200.158.155.187 19:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. And there should be an article or section about Súmula vinculante. A.Z. 20:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, "sumula vinculante" and "stare decisis" are different things. Writer didn't understand one of these two concepts.FabioPolli (talk) 22:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None of you look it out? Removing for discussion Elinruby (talk) 10:15, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Law of Brazil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100308121456/http://www.cursodireito.info/ to http://www.cursodireito.info/
• Added archive https://archive.is/20070516081349/http://jus2.uol.com.br/doutrina/texto.asp?id=10274 to http://jus2.uol.com.br/doutrina/texto.asp?id=10274
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091110120653/http://veja.abril.com.br/111109/popup_remuneracao.html to http://veja.abril.com.br/111109/popup_remuneracao.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:42, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]