Abstract

This article discusses the binding precedent rule contained in articles 6 and 19 of Law No 10.366 which regulates the powers and functions of the General Comptroller's Office (CGR). This kind of rule is seldom found in Civil Law systems. Hence, its application can generate some shortcomings. In fact, it can be seen that the CGR's precedents, in some cases, are not properly published and that they are applied to future cases as if they were abstract rules, rather than decisions referred to particular cases which are binding on sufficiently similar future cases. A different understanding of the CGR's case law bindingness is proposed.