Post by account_disabled on Jan 11, 2024 3:06:41 GMT -6
It is possible for the Public Treasury to enable, in bankruptcy proceedings, credit subject to ongoing tax enforcement, even before Law 14,112/2020 came into force , as long as there is no request for asset restriction in the enforcement proceeding. STJ Rapporteur, minister Gurgel de Faria, condensed jurisprudence on the topic into an STJ thesis This was the thesis unanimously approved by the 1st Section of the Superior Court of Justice in a judgment last Thursday afternoon (18/11). The statement is mandatory for the ordinary instances of the Brazilian Judiciary. The conclusion of the trial only reinforced the already pacified jurisprudence of the 1st and 2nd Panels of the court, which judge Public Law issues.
Both had already been deciding on the possibility of coexistence of tax enforcement and credit qualification in bankruptcy as a means for the Treasury to pursue its credits. Tax enforcement is the specific action for the Treasury to collect its debts, regulated by Law 6,830/1980 (Tax Execution Law) and the Telegram Number Data Civil Procedure Code, which is applied in a complementary manner. The Bankruptcy and Judicial Recovery Law (Law 11,101/2005) places the so-called universal court as the only competent court to, indivisibly, hear all actions regarding the bankrupt's business, with the exception of labor, tax and unregulated actions.
Reporting rapporteur, minister Gurgel de Faria highlighted that the interpretation of articles 5, 29 and 38 of the LEF, article 187 of the National Tax Code and article 76 of the Bankruptcy Law leads to the conclusion that execution and authorization of credit in the bankruptcy can coexist. The objective is to preserve the greatest interest, which is the satisfaction of the credit, "and the harmfulness of the bankruptcy process cannot be confused with the public entity's lack of interest in acting", concluded the rapporteur. STJ The topic is also considered in the STJ by the 3rd and 4th Panels, which judge Private Law STJ Controversial topic The topic, peaceful in the 1st Section, is also assessed from the perspective of Business Law in the 3rd and 4th Panels of the STJ, which make up the 2nd Section, responsible for judging Private Law cases.
Both had already been deciding on the possibility of coexistence of tax enforcement and credit qualification in bankruptcy as a means for the Treasury to pursue its credits. Tax enforcement is the specific action for the Treasury to collect its debts, regulated by Law 6,830/1980 (Tax Execution Law) and the Telegram Number Data Civil Procedure Code, which is applied in a complementary manner. The Bankruptcy and Judicial Recovery Law (Law 11,101/2005) places the so-called universal court as the only competent court to, indivisibly, hear all actions regarding the bankrupt's business, with the exception of labor, tax and unregulated actions.
Reporting rapporteur, minister Gurgel de Faria highlighted that the interpretation of articles 5, 29 and 38 of the LEF, article 187 of the National Tax Code and article 76 of the Bankruptcy Law leads to the conclusion that execution and authorization of credit in the bankruptcy can coexist. The objective is to preserve the greatest interest, which is the satisfaction of the credit, "and the harmfulness of the bankruptcy process cannot be confused with the public entity's lack of interest in acting", concluded the rapporteur. STJ The topic is also considered in the STJ by the 3rd and 4th Panels, which judge Private Law STJ Controversial topic The topic, peaceful in the 1st Section, is also assessed from the perspective of Business Law in the 3rd and 4th Panels of the STJ, which make up the 2nd Section, responsible for judging Private Law cases.