With the 1988 Federal Constitution, especially as for the explicit acknowledgement implemented by the Constitutional Amendment number 26, on 14/Feb/2000, which altered art. 6, the right to dwelling has gained the status of fundamental right. One of the main manifestations of the efficacy of the right to dwelling is to safeguard from the executive aggression of the creditors the dwelling-house owned by the debtors, by means of the restraint of mortgage mechanism. Currently, this protection is grounded by Law 8.009, from 29/03/1990. The guarantee of the restraint of mortgage of the dwelling-house conflicts with the creditor s right of property - with the status of fundamental right as well - and with the state tributary interest - constitutionally protected -, that necessarily suffers restraints to settle this manifestation of the efficacy of the right of dwelling. The dissertation intends to demonstrate, using the ponderation as a hermeneutic technique for solutions of the collisions among the constitutional norms, and of the proportionality and of the respect to the essential nucleus, as methodological verification instruments of the material validity (grounds of action) of the restraints imposed to the fundamental precepts in contest, which the restraint of mortgage of the dwelling-house shall only be constitutionally legitimate as far as the necessary limit to assure the subsistence of a proper dwelling for the debtor, situation in which has not been included the property upon the estate of high market price, which may be attached to assure the effectiveness of the creditors property right, with reserve of part of the money raised from the forced selling for the subsistence of the right to dwelling of the judgment debtor.