Post by account_disabled on Jan 11, 2024 3:51:26 GMT -5
If a company does not make the voluntary payment of a debt that is not subject to its judicial recovery plan, the execution of this credit may be subject to penalties of a 10% fine and legal fees, as provided for in article 523, paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 123RF A company undergoing judicial recovery can use its own assets to pay extra-competitive debts 123RF With this understanding, the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice partially granted the special appeal of Oi Móvel, a company that used the fact that it was in judicial recovery to justify the voluntary non-payment of a debt arising from a compensation action of which it was the target.
When the injured consumer requested the inclusion of the fine and fees of the amount in execution, the first degree court found it untenable, but the Court of Justice of Goiás reversed the decision, considering the credit was not suspended by the granting of judicial recovery. To the STJ, Oi Móvel pointed out that the fact that it is under construction prevents the free disposal of its assets. Therefore, there Telegram Number Data would be no way to voluntarily pay the obligation. Rapporteur of the appeal, Minister Nancy Andrighi pointed out that the text of the Bankruptcy and Judicial Recovery Law (Law 11,101/2005) does not prevent the company under recovery from voluntarily satisfying extra-competition credits pursued in individual executions.
If this were the case, the company under recovery would be prohibited from maintaining its own production activity, as it would not be able to pay suppliers, service providers and employees. Therefore, obligations not affected by judicial recovery must continue to be fulfilled normally by the debtor, with its consequences. The situation is different from that recently judged by the 3rd Panel itself, when it concluded that the credit subject to the judicial recovery process cannot be subject to a fine and legal fees. could only begin, in this case, after the recovering party was asked to make payment Gustavo Lima/STJ Factual peculiarity The case of Oi Móvel, on the other hand, brings a peculiarity highlighted by Minister Nancy Andrighi and sufficient to change the solution.
When the injured consumer requested the inclusion of the fine and fees of the amount in execution, the first degree court found it untenable, but the Court of Justice of Goiás reversed the decision, considering the credit was not suspended by the granting of judicial recovery. To the STJ, Oi Móvel pointed out that the fact that it is under construction prevents the free disposal of its assets. Therefore, there Telegram Number Data would be no way to voluntarily pay the obligation. Rapporteur of the appeal, Minister Nancy Andrighi pointed out that the text of the Bankruptcy and Judicial Recovery Law (Law 11,101/2005) does not prevent the company under recovery from voluntarily satisfying extra-competition credits pursued in individual executions.
If this were the case, the company under recovery would be prohibited from maintaining its own production activity, as it would not be able to pay suppliers, service providers and employees. Therefore, obligations not affected by judicial recovery must continue to be fulfilled normally by the debtor, with its consequences. The situation is different from that recently judged by the 3rd Panel itself, when it concluded that the credit subject to the judicial recovery process cannot be subject to a fine and legal fees. could only begin, in this case, after the recovering party was asked to make payment Gustavo Lima/STJ Factual peculiarity The case of Oi Móvel, on the other hand, brings a peculiarity highlighted by Minister Nancy Andrighi and sufficient to change the solution.
