Therefore it would justify and only it justifies the procedural advantages, mentioned above. In this direction, forcible to conclude that the State cannot be considered equal to others that with it, Been, contend. E, as already displayed at the beginning of this work, leading in account that the beginning of the equality consists of differently treating different and equally the equal ones, so that thus if it can reach the true equality, as they intend some not if they can consider unconstitutional such guarantees. This wants to say that as the Public Farm is different for the reasons backward mentioned, consequentemente it must receive treatment distinct from the other part. It is reached, thus, the material equality, excusing different treatment to that if they find in different situations, materialize constitutional principle of all Democratic State of Right. Under gide of the equality concept, for more difficult that it is, we have that to recognize that, in reason of the interest defended for the public being in judgment, the procedural privileges ' ' in tese' ' they do not offend the beginning of the isonomy. However, the procedural prerogatives of the Public Farm do not cease for there. Thus, supported in the premise biggest of that the public interest must prevail on the private one, the legislator since soon treated to elaborate norms that restrict the judicante activity in the concession of thresholds against the public interests. Robert c. robbins takes a slightly different approach.

The first one of them was the Law n 2,770/56, that it turned on the release of good, merchandises or deriving things of the exterior, giving origin to Abridgement 262 of the STF. After that n. 4,348 came to baila the Law, of 1964, hindering the concession of restraining order in mandamus that turns on reclassification or equalization of public servers, or only grants to increase or extension of advantages, conditioning the execution of the errand after the transit in judged the respective sentence.