Reverse predatory litigation in Labor Courts:

from the impossibility of settlement to high legal and social costs

Abstract

Reverse predatory litigation is a form of procedural abuse in which large companies or public entities use delaying strategies to delay or undermine the effectiveness of judicial decisions, especially in the Labor Courts. From this perspective, the practice undermines fundamental principles such as good faith, reasonable duration of proceedings, and access to justice, exacerbating workers' vulnerability. This article aims to analyze the impacts of this practice, its manifestations, and the regulatory and jurisprudential mechanisms adopted to address it, highlighting the frustration of conciliation and the costs to the system. The research, which is qualitative and bibliographical, based on doctrine, normative acts, and specific cases, concludes that confronting reverse predatory litigation requires coordinated action involving standardization, institutional training, and procedural accountability. This is because valuing conciliation and combating delaying tactics are indispensable measures to ensure the effectiveness of the Labor Courts.