Abstract
This article presents an analysis of the rulings issued by the Supreme Court of Justice - Labor Chamber and Labor Congestion Chamber - regarding the operationality of survivor pensions in same-sex couples. To achieve this, a qualitative methodology of jurisprudential review is employed to analyze the rules and sub-rules applied by the judges in resolving these cases, contrasting them with certain foundational ideas of queer legal theories. In this analytical exercise, the text elucidates how, within the dogmatic rules devised by the ordinary labor judge, there are emancipatory opportunities that escape the binary gender paradigm. One of the main conclusions drawn from this analysis is the progressive role played by the Labor Cassation Chamber and the Congestion Chamber within labor law, in formulating norms that acknowledge differentiated cohabitation for the acquisition of survivor pensions for same-sex couples.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
