{"id":729502,"date":"2026-04-28T12:16:30","date_gmt":"2026-04-28T10:16:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/"},"modified":"2026-04-28T12:16:30","modified_gmt":"2026-04-28T10:16:30","slug":"acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/","title":{"rendered":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"kji-decision\">\n<p class=\"kji-summary\">Relator: RIJO FERREIRA. I. Um documento que foi j? apresentado no processo em que foi proferida a decis?o a rever n?o pode ser invocado como fundamento do recurso de revis?o nos termos da al. c) do art.? 696? do CPC. II. O Recorrente ao reconhecer que o fundamento do recurso de revis?o ? o erro na decis?o de facto derivado da falta de um documento e simultaneamente assumir que com o recurso de revis?o intenta a reabertura da aprecia??o da prova j? constante dos autos com vista a obter uma diferente valora??o da mesma, demonstra estar consciente da falta de fundamento do recurso e de estar a fazer um uso anormal do processo protelando infundadamente o t?rmino da lide, incorrendo em litig?ncia de m?-f?.<\/p>\n<hr class=\"kji-sep\" \/>\n<p class=\"kji-source-links\"><strong>Sources officielles :<\/strong> <a class=\"kji-source-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.dgsi.pt\/jstj.nsf\/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814\/6f9e677c2341a18d8025863500032ef5?OpenDocument&#038;ExpandSection=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"kji-license-note\"><em>Portails officiels portugais (DGSI \/ Tribunal Constitucional). Republication en metadata_only par prudence licencielle ; consulter la source officielle pour le texte authentique.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Relator: RIJO FERREIRA. I. Um documento que foi j? apresentado no processo em que foi proferida a decis?o a rever n?o pode ser invocado como fundamento do recurso de revis?o nos termos da al. c) do art.? 696? do CPC. II. O Recorrente ao reconhecer que o fundamento do recurso de revis?o ? o erro na decis?o de facto derivado da falta de um documento e simultaneamente assumir que com o recurso de revis?o intenta a reabertura da aprecia??o da prova j? constante dos autos com vista a obter uma diferente valora??o da mesma, demonstra estar consciente da falta de fundamento do recurso e de estar a fazer um uso anormal do processo protelando infundadamente o t?rmino da lide, incorrendo em litig?ncia de m?-f?.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7762],"kji_court":[7763],"kji_chamber":[41100],"kji_year":[41198],"kji_subject":[7724],"kji_keyword":[7772,7774,7771,7773,7636],"kji_language":[7770],"class_list":["post-729502","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-portugal","kji_court-supremo-tribunal-de-justica","kji_chamber-2-seco-cvel","kji_year-41198","kji_subject-civil","kji_keyword-acordao","kji_keyword-justica","kji_keyword-processo","kji_keyword-supremo","kji_keyword-tribunal","kji_language-pt"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.5 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Relator: RIJO FERREIRA. I. Um documento que foi j? apresentado no processo em que foi proferida a decis?o a rever n?o pode ser invocado como fundamento do recurso de revis?o nos termos da al. c) do art.? 696? do CPC. II. O Recorrente ao reconhecer que o fundamento do recurso de revis?o ? o erro na decis?o de facto derivado da falta de um documento e simultaneamente assumir que com o recurso de revis?o intenta a reabertura da aprecia??o da prova j? constante dos autos com vista a obter uma diferente valora??o da mesma, demonstra estar consciente da falta de fundamento do recurso e de estar a fazer um uso anormal do processo protelando infundadamente o t?rmino da lide, incorrendo em litig?ncia de m?-f?.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0430\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\\\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-28T10:16:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\\\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29","og_description":"Relator: RIJO FERREIRA. I. Um documento que foi j? apresentado no processo em que foi proferida a decis?o a rever n?o pode ser invocado como fundamento do recurso de revis?o nos termos da al. c) do art.? 696? do CPC. II. O Recorrente ao reconhecer que o fundamento do recurso de revis?o ? o erro na decis?o de facto derivado da falta de um documento e simultaneamente assumir que com o recurso de revis?o intenta a reabertura da aprecia??o da prova j? constante dos autos com vista a obter uma diferente valora??o da mesma, demonstra estar consciente da falta de fundamento do recurso e de estar a fazer um uso anormal do processo protelando infundadamente o t?rmino da lide, incorrendo em litig?ncia de m?-f?.","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"1 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0430"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/","name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-28T10:16:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-400-11-0tbcvl-e-c1-s1-2020-10-29\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 400\/11.0TBCVL-E.C1.S1 \u2013 2020-10-29"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/729502","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=729502"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=729502"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=729502"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=729502"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=729502"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=729502"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=729502"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=729502"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}