Post by xyz3700 on Feb 27, 2024 2:01:43 GMT -5
The revelation of a new factual context involving the debtor company makes it possible to present a new request for disregard of the legal personality, without characterizing a reiteration of the request made previously. With this understanding, the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal of a construction company that sought to prevent the analysis of a new request for disregard of the legal personality made by a property owner in the course of an execution. The rapporteur of the special appeal, Minister Nancy Andrighi, stated that the judicial decisions that reject the request for disregard are linked to the factual context that supports them. "As execution continues and other elements emerge that demonstrate, from a new factual context, the existence of the requirements authorizing the measure, nothing prevents the request from being renewed, in the search for satisfaction of the creditor's enforceable claim, which is the ultimate aim execution", explained the rapporteur.
In the special appeal, the construction company maintained that the preclusion regarding the disregard of the legal personality occurred, in view of the previous rejection of the same request, without an appeal having been filed against the decision. The construction company stated that the owner, on three occasions during the execution, tried to disregard it, a claim that was rejected on three occasions. After the last Chinese Malaysia Phone Number List rejection, the Court of Justice of Paraná granted an appeal to allow a new examination of the request for disregard, taking into account elements brought to the process by the creditor based on the analysis of the situation of 12 companies that would form an economic group family, with the report of acts that would constitute patrimonial, corporate and functional confusion, in addition to violations of the law and social statutes.
According to Nancy Andrighi, the TJ-PR considered that in the last judicial pronouncement there was no debate “on the request to disregard the legal personality of business companies from the perspective of the alleged formation of the family economic group” — which, for the minister, justifies the new analysis under a new factual context. The rapporteur noted that the decision of the court of origin was taken based on the analysis of the evidence in the case, and its re-examination in a special appeal was unfeasible. In the minister's understanding, “this is a request deduced based on a different factual framework, and not a mere reiteration of the same request, which — this one — would be covered by estoppel”. With information from the STJ Press Office.
In the special appeal, the construction company maintained that the preclusion regarding the disregard of the legal personality occurred, in view of the previous rejection of the same request, without an appeal having been filed against the decision. The construction company stated that the owner, on three occasions during the execution, tried to disregard it, a claim that was rejected on three occasions. After the last Chinese Malaysia Phone Number List rejection, the Court of Justice of Paraná granted an appeal to allow a new examination of the request for disregard, taking into account elements brought to the process by the creditor based on the analysis of the situation of 12 companies that would form an economic group family, with the report of acts that would constitute patrimonial, corporate and functional confusion, in addition to violations of the law and social statutes.
According to Nancy Andrighi, the TJ-PR considered that in the last judicial pronouncement there was no debate “on the request to disregard the legal personality of business companies from the perspective of the alleged formation of the family economic group” — which, for the minister, justifies the new analysis under a new factual context. The rapporteur noted that the decision of the court of origin was taken based on the analysis of the evidence in the case, and its re-examination in a special appeal was unfeasible. In the minister's understanding, “this is a request deduced based on a different factual framework, and not a mere reiteration of the same request, which — this one — would be covered by estoppel”. With information from the STJ Press Office.