Post by xyz3700 on Feb 27, 2024 0:37:15 GMT -5
The 180-day period of suspension of executions against the company undergoing judicial recovery — the so-called stay period —, provided for in the Recovery and Bankruptcy Law, must be counted in calendar days, even after the new rules of the Code of Civil Procedure of 2015. The understanding comes from the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice and unifies the STJ's position on the topic, as the 4th Panel had already expressed itself in the same sense (REsp 1.699.528). Originally, the court of law of the 1st Civil Court of the District of Aparecida de Goiânia (GO) granted the request for judicial recovery of a fertilizer company and ordered the suspension of all executions against it for 180 "working" days.
When denying the bank's appeal against the decision, the Court of Justice of Goiás stated that CPC/2015 changed the calculation of procedural deadlines to working days and, therefore, the same logic should be applied to the suspension of executions provided for in the Bankruptcy Law and Business Recovery. For minister Marco Aurélio Bellizze, rapporteur of the bank's appeal to the STJ, the counting of the period in calendar days must be Chinese Malaysia Phone Number List due to the material nature of the law, and not due to the incompatibility of the CPC/2015 with the regime established in the Bankruptcy Law. The method of counting working days established by CPC/2015, according to the rapporteur, is only applicable to a certain period set out in Law if it is of a procedural nature and as long as the rule is compatible with the temporal logic adopted by the legislator in the Bankruptcy Law.
The minister highlighted that the 180-day period is a legal benefit granted to the recovering company that is “absolutely essential” so that it can regularize and reorganize its accounts with a view to restructuring. “In this way, it is clear that the stay period is of a material nature, with no reference to the practice of procedural acts or the jurisdictional activity itself, and should therefore be counted in calendar days”, declared the rapporteur . Bellizze highlighted that the deadlines directly related to the stay period must comply with the continuous counting method, in order to align with the temporal logic of the recovery process imposed by the special legislator.The third and final assumption is related to the administrator's personal lack of interest in the underlying issue, that is, the decision must be made in the interest of society, never in the personal interest of the administrator, issues that are intrinsically related to the duty of loyalty.
When denying the bank's appeal against the decision, the Court of Justice of Goiás stated that CPC/2015 changed the calculation of procedural deadlines to working days and, therefore, the same logic should be applied to the suspension of executions provided for in the Bankruptcy Law and Business Recovery. For minister Marco Aurélio Bellizze, rapporteur of the bank's appeal to the STJ, the counting of the period in calendar days must be Chinese Malaysia Phone Number List due to the material nature of the law, and not due to the incompatibility of the CPC/2015 with the regime established in the Bankruptcy Law. The method of counting working days established by CPC/2015, according to the rapporteur, is only applicable to a certain period set out in Law if it is of a procedural nature and as long as the rule is compatible with the temporal logic adopted by the legislator in the Bankruptcy Law.
The minister highlighted that the 180-day period is a legal benefit granted to the recovering company that is “absolutely essential” so that it can regularize and reorganize its accounts with a view to restructuring. “In this way, it is clear that the stay period is of a material nature, with no reference to the practice of procedural acts or the jurisdictional activity itself, and should therefore be counted in calendar days”, declared the rapporteur . Bellizze highlighted that the deadlines directly related to the stay period must comply with the continuous counting method, in order to align with the temporal logic of the recovery process imposed by the special legislator.The third and final assumption is related to the administrator's personal lack of interest in the underlying issue, that is, the decision must be made in the interest of society, never in the personal interest of the administrator, issues that are intrinsically related to the duty of loyalty.