Originally Posted by Simenon
To one who is uninitiated in the legal terminology you are using, your writing appears clear and to the point. For the sake of clarity, I would only suggest the following changes, which I've maked up in red:
Judicial sentences are given to the parties in form of texts. It is of fundamental importance that the text through
witch which a judicial sentence is given is clear or at least understandable. Although judicial sentences are normally clear, the number of cases of incoherent, obscure, or incomprehensible texts is worth noting. Frequently, the problem is detected only when the parties demand compliance with the sentence and no resource in order to concerning its clarification is still available anymore. When the meaning of the sentence is a mystery, it is necessary to know what one ought to do in relation to it. Specially, it is necessary In these cases, it is especially necessary to know how the res judicata doctrine relates to these questions concerning these judicial sentences.
The This thesis presents a theory based on the different degrees of obscurity that a judicial sentence can show may manifest, and on as well as the dissimilarities between the creation, interpretation, and enforcement of judicial decisions. Starting from these distinctions, answers are given according to Brazilian procedural law.