O limite das presunções na responsabilidade civil e o dano moral in re ipsa na jurisprudência do STJ

Abstract

This article examines the limits of the application of presumptions in Brazilian civil liability, focusing on the understanding of moral damages in re ipsa and their configuration in the case law of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ). The research demonstrates that, as an evidentiary technique, this alternative plays an important role in effectively protecting human dignity by exempting the victim from producing evidence in circumstances where this proves difficult or impossible. However, its excessive application also highlights potential risks of trivializing the institution when applied indiscriminately and without clear criteria. The work explores the theoretical foundations of civil liability in Brazilian law, analyzes the main doctrinal currents on the subject, and examines the development of the STJ’s case law, highlighting paradigmatic hypotheses of recognition, the limitations imposed by the Court, and the internal divergences between its Panels. Special attention is given to the contribution of Justice Antonio Carlos Ferreira, whose votes in important cases (such as Resp 1,512,001/ SP, Resp 2,161,428/SP, and Resp 2,155,065/MG) were decisive in curbing excesses and reaffirming the centrality of the causal link and the damage requirement in the civil liability system. Taking a straightforward approach, it is concluded that moral damages in re ipsa should be understood as an exceptional technique and applied only in cases of unquestionable gravity, in order to preserve the victim’s protection, without neglecting the necessary legal certainty.