The incongruity of the Court ruling. The omission.

The incongruity of the ruling is the mismatch between the judgment and the terms on which the parties made ​​their claims; granting more or less, or something different than requested.

The judgment must decide the disputes submitted by answering to all the claims made by the parties.

If you give more, less or something different to the request, the court incurs forms of inconsistency known as

·        Incongruity by omission

·        Extra petitum (award more than claimed)

·        Incongruity by error

The incongruity by omission, also known as incongruity “ex silentio” occurs when the court leaves unanswered some of the claims submitted to it by the parties, as long as it cannot be reasonably interpreted that the judgment includes a tacit dismissal of those “unanswered claims”, and the tacit dismissal can be deducted form the reasoning contained in the resolution.

The Fundamental Right to effective judicial protection is the value infringed when the judgment falls into incongruity.

It is not necessary that the judgment includes, an explicit and detailed response to all and each of the arguments adduced by the parties in support of their claim.  It may be omitted the answer to allegations regarded as non-substantial, or nonspecific.