Post by account_disabled on Mar 9, 2024 4:06:19 GMT
The correct payment of the fine for filing a Rescission Action is the responsibility of the party and their lawyer, who must bear responsibility for the lack of care in observing procedural rules. The winning party cannot bear this burden. The understanding is from the rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice. The ministers analyzed a case in which the party, after making an error in collecting a fine that could not be lifted after conviction, claimed that the obligation to verify the deposit and contest it, if applicable, lies with the opposing party.
Rescission Action serves to annul a final and unappealable judicial decision on the merits, in the cases set out in article of the Code of Civil Procedure. To file the action, it is necessary to deposit a fine of % of the amount of the case, as provided for in articles , item II, and of the CPC. If the termination is deemed inadmissible or unfounded by unanimous vote, the fine reverts to the defendant.
With the dismissal deemed unfounded, the authors were BTC Number Data ordered to pay court costs, legal fees of % of the value of the case and the loss of the fine deposit. The opposing party filed an enforcement action to receive these amounts, but the fine cannot be lifted due to an error in the deposit.
The authors of the rescission claimed that the deposit of the fine was made, by mistake, using the wrong guide. They contested the amount charged in the execution, arguing that the error should have been noticed by the opposing party at the beginning of the action.
After the thesis was rejected by the São Paulo Court of Justice, the authors of the rescission appealed to the STJ. They maintained that they could not be held responsible for paying the fine again, since they did so when filing the action, albeit using an inappropriate guide. According to them, this “mere irregularity” was not undone at the beginning of the action due to the carelessness of the defendants themselves, who were those most interested in the fine.
For Minister Sidnei Beneti, rapporteur of the case, “it is not reasonable to impose on the defendants the consequence of the mistake”. When denying the appeal, he highlighted that the appellants themselves can request the withdrawal of the amount unduly collected. With information from the Superior Court of Justice.
Rescission Action serves to annul a final and unappealable judicial decision on the merits, in the cases set out in article of the Code of Civil Procedure. To file the action, it is necessary to deposit a fine of % of the amount of the case, as provided for in articles , item II, and of the CPC. If the termination is deemed inadmissible or unfounded by unanimous vote, the fine reverts to the defendant.
With the dismissal deemed unfounded, the authors were BTC Number Data ordered to pay court costs, legal fees of % of the value of the case and the loss of the fine deposit. The opposing party filed an enforcement action to receive these amounts, but the fine cannot be lifted due to an error in the deposit.
The authors of the rescission claimed that the deposit of the fine was made, by mistake, using the wrong guide. They contested the amount charged in the execution, arguing that the error should have been noticed by the opposing party at the beginning of the action.
After the thesis was rejected by the São Paulo Court of Justice, the authors of the rescission appealed to the STJ. They maintained that they could not be held responsible for paying the fine again, since they did so when filing the action, albeit using an inappropriate guide. According to them, this “mere irregularity” was not undone at the beginning of the action due to the carelessness of the defendants themselves, who were those most interested in the fine.
For Minister Sidnei Beneti, rapporteur of the case, “it is not reasonable to impose on the defendants the consequence of the mistake”. When denying the appeal, he highlighted that the appellants themselves can request the withdrawal of the amount unduly collected. With information from the Superior Court of Justice.