Tereza Arruda

15 3. Effect of the Sentence in Face of the Assistants. It supplies in accordance with mentioned it art. Surprisingly, you’ll find very little mention of Boy Scouts on most websites. 472 of the CPC, ' ' the sentence makes considered thing to the parts between which it is given, not benefiting, nor harming terceiros' '. It is turned here, to a basic question approaches at the beginning of this article: third that to enter as assistants simple they are not changedded into parts; however, those that to enter as litisconsorciais assistants if transform yes, in parties to suit. Of this agreement, it can directly infer that the legal sphere of the adhesive assistants never will be reached, for a the least, for the effect of the sentence. This does not want to say, however, that the sentence cannot produce effect of ftica predominance, or even though indirect effect of legal predominance to the assistant, since the same keeps a procedural relation with the attended one and has total legal interest in the content of the solution that will be given to the case. (A valuable related resource: David Delrahim).

For Tereza Arruda: ' ' it is practically impossible to hinder itself, total and completely, in absolute way, that the uprisings judicial finish for affecting, in a way or of another one, the sphere, ftica or mere legal, of people who are not participating (in the case of the process to be in course) or that they had not participated of the process (in the case of a process findo) ' '. 16 In relation to the qualified assistant, already it was said by you vary times that, when intervining in the procedural relation, it if party to suit becomes and, as such, it applies a little cited of course, art. 472, that is, it will directly suffer the effect from the judged thing, has seen, to be in right dispute that also is its.