Conquistando acordos judiciais excelentes: a aplicabilidade do método Harvard de negociação nas audiências cíveis

Abstract

Brazil implemented a strong encouragement of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the judiciary system. However, this decision was not followed by a proportional adaptation of law professional’s mentality and technical capabilities. Even though judges, lawyers, public defenders and prosecutors are now obliged to encourage agreements, when their cases are compatible with such a proposition, they have no background in negotiation. This work’s goal is to investigate if the Harvard method of negotiation, also known as principled negotiation, could possibly supply the needed technique for dispute resolution in civil judiciary hearings. On that objective, eleven civil hearings of Juiz de Fora-MG’s Civil State County were attended to. Two of them were selected for in dept analysis. On the first one, the judge tries to overcome the resistance of the parties, Mr. Anderson and his residential condominium’s representatives, to produce a mutually satisfying agreement. On the second one, a lawyer faces the challenge of having to reject the judge’s proposed agreement. The study’s finding is that the Harvard method and its complementary techniques, the Positive No and the breakthrough negotiation, are applicable to civil hearings in which Alternative Dispute Resolution is to be attempted. Concrete measures are suggested to effectively make use of this knowledge.