Post by account_disabled on Mar 6, 2024 3:13:17 GMT -6
It is not possible to impose a daily fine against a defendant to force him to account. For the th Panel of the Superior Court of Justice the law provides a specific sanction for the defendant who forced by the judge fails to render accounts: the impossibility of contesting those presented by the author.
In this case a company filed a lawsuit against Banco do Brasil. She asked for clarification regarding the credit opening contract. The author requested in addition to the presentation of the contract information such as the entries made in the current account and the interest charged for the use of credit.
The bank was sentenced in the first degree to account for BTC Number Data the company's financial transactions within hours. The court also set a fine of R$ per day of delay in presenting documents. The bank disagreed with the sentence but the appeal was denied by the Court of Justice of Paraná.
At the STJ Banco do Brasil argued that it is not appropriate to impose a daily fine in the event of noncompliance in an accountability action. The bank claimed that the procedural law already provides for the impossibility of questioning the accounts presented by the author as a sanction.
Minister Luis Felipe Salomão judged the institution's allegations to be valid. For the rapporteur there is no need to impose a mandatory fine astreintes in this case. He stated that the legalprocedural consequence of the defendant's failure to present the accounts is the acceptance of the accounts prepared by the plaintiff as provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure.
The rapporteur also said that the spirit of the procedural law seems to follow the principle that a mandatory fine will only be imposed when another more practical and effective solution is not foreseen. He recalled that Precedent which states that “in the action of displaying documents it is not possible to impose a punitive fine also does not authorize the collection in the action of accountability. The Panel unanimously upheld the Special Appeal from the bank. With information from the STJ Press Office.
In this case a company filed a lawsuit against Banco do Brasil. She asked for clarification regarding the credit opening contract. The author requested in addition to the presentation of the contract information such as the entries made in the current account and the interest charged for the use of credit.
The bank was sentenced in the first degree to account for BTC Number Data the company's financial transactions within hours. The court also set a fine of R$ per day of delay in presenting documents. The bank disagreed with the sentence but the appeal was denied by the Court of Justice of Paraná.
At the STJ Banco do Brasil argued that it is not appropriate to impose a daily fine in the event of noncompliance in an accountability action. The bank claimed that the procedural law already provides for the impossibility of questioning the accounts presented by the author as a sanction.
Minister Luis Felipe Salomão judged the institution's allegations to be valid. For the rapporteur there is no need to impose a mandatory fine astreintes in this case. He stated that the legalprocedural consequence of the defendant's failure to present the accounts is the acceptance of the accounts prepared by the plaintiff as provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure.
The rapporteur also said that the spirit of the procedural law seems to follow the principle that a mandatory fine will only be imposed when another more practical and effective solution is not foreseen. He recalled that Precedent which states that “in the action of displaying documents it is not possible to impose a punitive fine also does not authorize the collection in the action of accountability. The Panel unanimously upheld the Special Appeal from the bank. With information from the STJ Press Office.