Post by account_disabled on Mar 12, 2024 9:15:57 GMT
Lawyers specializing in judicial recovery and agribusiness are disagreeing on a decision by the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice. The ministers decided that rural entrepreneurs, although they need to be registered with the Board of Trade to request judicial recovery, can calculate the period prior to the formalization of registration to meet the minimum period of two years required by article 48 of Law 11,101/2005.
reproduction
reproduction
With the decision , the STJ's two private law groups now have a unified position on the topic. REsp 1,800,032 was analyzed by the 4th Panel.
For the vice-president of the Brazilian Academy of Tax Law (ABDT) and agribusiness specialist, Eduardo Diamantino , the decision was the right one. "Requiring seniority of Portugal Mobile Number List registration with the Board of those who work as rural entrepreneurs is a bureaucratic requirement that only served creditors (banks) in the incessant search for profitability. This time, the countryside won. It remains to monitor the progress of the new judicial recovery law so that the benefit remains there", assesses the lawyer.
Antonio Carlos de Oliveira Freitas , specialist in credit recovery and partner at Luchesi Advogados, disagrees . "I do not understand that the aforementioned decision has, in fact, consolidated the STJ's position. It is a November 2019 ruling, in the Pupin case, but I do not see it as a pacification of the matter. In any case, the understanding is regrettable of the STJ, as it demonstrates that it is dissociated from what occurs in the daily commercial dynamics of legal transactions in the agro-industrial complex", he criticizes.
"The situation actually consolidates legal uncertainty. Such permission — to accept the request for judicial recovery by an individual rural producer, even without two years of registration with the Board of Trade — must also be supported by the bill that amends the Law of Bankruptcy and Judicial Recovery, bringing an increase in transaction costs, with repercussions on the cost of credit for the sector. Unfortunately, in Brazil, whoever is a creditor ends up becoming a villain, in a Manichaean vision that should not be crystallized in this sense. There is no point in moving forward in laws to introduce modern instruments for financing the sector and, on the other hand, instill a high degree of uncertainty to the detriment of those who finance this branch of economic activity", says the lawyer.
According to lawyer Domingos Fernando Refinetti , partner in the Judicial Recovery area at WZ Advogados, the STJ's decision accentuates the chronic problem of legal insecurity in Brazil. "This is because credit, for example, was granted under one scenario and will end up being framed in another, retroactive and extremely unfavorable for the creditor. Evidently, economic agents will price this new circumstance for the future and may be more demanding in terms of which concerns the requirement that rural producers begin to obtain their respective registration with their Commercial Boards. On the other hand, there is an irreparable loss with regard to credits granted to rural producers prior to the decision, which will now be avail of judicial recovery in relation to credits that were granted to them under the pure protection of civil law."