A RDFMC está aberta à submissão de artigos, recensões, anotações jurisprudenciais e notas legislativas e doutrinárias. Todos estes estudos devem ser enviados para o seguinte e-mail: rdfmc@blook.email with the title: Submissão de estudo para a RDFMC
RDFMC is open to the submission of articles, reviews, case law notes and legislative and doctrinal notes. All such papers should be sent to the following e-mail address: rdfmc@blook.email with the title: Submissão de estudo para a RDFMC
General Guidelines
1. Papers should be sent to the e-mail: rdfmc@blook.email. All contacts between the Authors and RDFMC are made through said e-mail.
2. The submitted papers are subject to prior assessment by the Board, assisted by the Editorial Committee, in order to assess their formal and substantive adequacy.
3. The Author shall be informed, by the Board, of the content of the preliminary decision within a maximum of 10 days from the date of submission. This decision, in case of a positive answer, is not binding.
4. After the previous assessment, the paper is sent, according to the subject matter, to the most qualified Referee, in the strict respect for the anonymity of the Author.
5. The Referee shall return the Assessment Form no later than 45 days from the date of distribution.
6. The Author is informed, by the Board, of the content of the decision: (i) recommended for publication without reservation; (ii) recommended for publication with reservation; and (iii) not recommended for publication.
7. The Author has 30 days to reformulate the papers assessed with recommended for publication with reservations.
8. After the reformulation provided for in paragraph 7, it is the responsibility of the Board to confirm the resolution of the indicated reservations.
9. The Author has 10 days to review and submit the final proofs of work assessed as recommended without reservation.
Relevant Information
1. Only those who have significantly contributed to the drafting of the submitted paper should appear as Authors.
2. Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of the papers. Authors should only submit unpublished papers of their own authorship, not edited in other publications, regardless of their nature.
3. Authors must indicate any sources of funding used for the research of the submitted papers. This indication should be made in a footnote on the first page of the paper.
4. Authors should indicate any conflicts of interest that may influence the content of the submitted paper and the recommended conclusions.
5. Authors must comply with RDFMC's Style Book and Citation Guidelines.
6. Authors must report to the Board any errors, inaccuracies or significant inaccuracies in papers already published in RDFMC.
7. Authors are entitled to a fair, impartial, prompt and anonymous assessment of the papers they submit.
1. Referees assist the Editorial Committee and the Board. They are responsible for the assessment of the papers that are forwarded to them.
2. The assessment of the Referees shall be objective and scientific. In particular, they shall assess the interest and originality of the work submitted, the use of updated and relevant legislative, jurisprudential and doctrinal sources, the respect for the RDFMC Code of Ethics, the Style Book and the Citation Guidelines.
3. Referees should fill in, in respect of each paper, the RDFMC’s Assessment Form.
4. Referees shall refuse the task of assessment where they do not feel qualified to carry it out, in accordance with the Code of Ethics.
5. Referees shall respect the time limits indicated for the assessment of the papers assigned to them.
6. Referees shall guarantee the confidentiality of the assessed papers and shall refrain from commenting, disclosing, or using the contents of the assessed papers before their publication.
7. Referees shall ensure the confidentiality of the task performed and shall refrain from disclosing the titles of the assessed papers.
8. Before accepting the assessment task, Referees shall disclose to the Board any conflicts of interest that may influence the result of the assessment.
1. The Board is responsible for all content published in RDFMC. It is responsible for ensuring the quality of the papers published and for promoting the scientific integrity of RDFMC.
2. The Board shall ensure compliance with the Code of Ethics. It shall ensure compliance with all obligations and rights, of Authors, Referees, Editorial Committee members and Readers, arising from the Code of Ethics and the Law.
3. The Editorial Committee assists the Board in the scientific management of RDFMC.
4. It is the responsibility of the Board, assisted by the Editorial Committee, to conduct a preliminary assessment of the papers submitted.
5. It is the responsibility of the Board, assisted by the Editorial Committee, to distribute the papers submitted to the most qualified Referees.
6. It is the responsibility of the Board, assisted by the Editorial Committee, to decide on the publication of legislative and doctrinal notes - with a maximum length of 2 000 characters -, jurisprudential notes and reviews that are submitted to it.
1. Articles between 5 000 and 20 000 characters in length, without abstract and bibliography.
2. Structure
Title in Portuguese and in English
Summary (Portuguese, if the Article is in Portuguese)
Abstract (English)
Keywords - 5 at most
Text
Bibliography, in alphabetical order
3. Formatting of the main text:
Font: Times New Roman
Size: 12
Spacing; 1.2
4. Formatting of the Summary (if applicable) and Abstract:
Font: Times New Roman in italics
Maximum 200 characters with spaces
Spacing: 1.2
1.1. Livros
One author
António Menezes Cordeiro, Tratado de Direito civil, I, 4ª ed., Almedina: Coimbra (2012), 76-87.
Name, Title, volume, edition, publisher: city (year), page(s).
Two or more authors
Vital Moreira/J.J. Gomes Canotilho, Constituição da República Portuguesa anotada, I, 4ª ed., Coimbra ed.: Coimbra (2014), 23-24.
Name/Name, Title, volume, edition, publisher: city (year), page(s).
1.2. Capítulo de Livro
José de Oliveira Ascensão, Onerosidade excessiva por “alteração das circunstâncias” em Estudos em Memória do Professor Doutor José Dias Marques, coord. Ruy de Albuquerque/António Menezes Cordeiro, Almedina: Coimbra (2007), 515-536, 320.
Nome/Nome, Título, volume, edição, coord. Nome/Nome, editora: cidade (ano), páginas do artigo, página(s) referida(s).
1.3. Traduções
Karl Larenz, Metodologia da Ciência do Direito, 3ª ed., trad. José Lamego, Gulbenkian: Lisboa (1997), 7.
Name, Title, volume, edition, transl. Name, publisher: city (year), page(s).
1.4. Revistas
Physical format
Maria Raquel Rei, Da expectativa jurídica, 54 ROA (1994), 149-180, 154.
Nome, Título, volume, número da revista abreviatura da revista, (ano), páginas do artigo, página(a) referida(s).
Online format
Emily L. Sherwin, Fiduciary Law and Equity: Enforcing Loyalty (25-mar.-2018). Acessível em SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3149092 (consultado a 21 de maio de 2018), 13.
Nome, Título (data). Acessível em nome do sítio: https:// (data da consulta), página(s) referida(s).
1.5. Decisões Jurisprudenciais
Online format
STJ 27-fev.-2018 (Fonseca Ramos), proc. n.º 1860/08.2T8ABF.E1.S1.
Abreviatura do Tribunal data (relator da decisão), número do processo.
Physical format
RCb 29-jan.-1926 (J. Sereno), 60 RLJ (1927), 171-174, 172.
Abreviatura do Tribunal data (relator da decisão), número da revista abreviatura da revista, (ano), páginas da decisão, página(a) referida(s).
1.6. Citações seguintes
Journals
Na segunda citação, o artigo de revista deve ser citado apenas com o apelido(s) do Autor, a primeira e segunda palavra, no caso de a primeira ser um pronome, e a página(s) referida(s).
Ex.: Rei, A expectativa cit., 167.
Books
Na segunda citação, a obra deve ser citada apenas com o apelido(s) do Autor, o volume, a primeira e segunda palavra, no caso de a primeira ser um pronome, e a página(s) referida(s).
Ex.: Menezes Cordeiro, Tratado I cit., 676.
End notes
As citações são sempre feitas em nota de rodapé e não no texto principal.
Correct example
Por direito subjetivo, entende-se, no seguimento de Menezes Cordeiro, uma “permissão normativa específica de aproveitamento de um bem”.
Incorrect example:
Por direito subjetivo, entende-se, no seguimento de Menezes Cordeiro, uma “permissão normativa específica de aproveitamento de um bem” (Menezes Cordeiro, 2012).