The problem of the so-called target budget revocatory action: When there is “prejudice the creditor"?

Abstract

At what point we can say that a debtor's conduct impairs the right to collect that assists the creditor. When the judge warned that caused damage or not at the time exercised judicially collection. There are perhaps criteria for the existence of damages, if any, perpetrating against the economic rights of the creditor or what interest and rights should prevail, the creditor or the third party that purchased the debtor. At the national level, our little or no doctrine has not taken pains to address this real problem and less to our puny jurisprudence, according to the revised our Supreme Court decisions. It is worrying that our legal theorists have not taken into account that the injury historically known as damni events, such as a nuclear aspect of the revocatory action, has cavalierly ignored.
In the present article is to outline more precisely the problem of determining the eventus damni approach, and thereby try to call the attention of legal scholars to address this gap, as we all know, it is one of the core factors that gives direction and meaning to the inveterate revocatory action.