Post by xyz3800 on Feb 27, 2024 22:34:17 GMT -6
As we know, the labor legislation in force in Brazil was sanctioned in 1943, which is why it could not foresee a large part of contemporary legal relations. In this way, the legislator, at the time, provided for the use of common procedural law in cases in which the CLT was silent, notably in the form of its article 769 . This was the case with regard to the figure of the withdrawing partner , a partner who leaves a company by assigning or selling all of his shares in a company. In view of the great difficulty that is occasionally imposed on the employee, in the context of a labor claim, in executing their labor credit, the Labor Court applies the disregard of the legal personality of the employing company, making its partners responsible for the payment of the value determined in the specific action.
Prior to the entry into force of Law the Civil Code, notably through its articles 1,003, sole paragraph, and 1,032, was used analogously to the work process to delimit the liability of the withdrawing partner, a topic that has always provoked many divergences in jurisprudence and doctrine, aiming to pacify, without success, to what Exit Mobile Number List extent or for what period this type of partner would be liable for the labor debt. From what can be inferred from both legal provisions, there is no doubt that the withdrawing partner is jointly and severally liable with the current partners for the company's debts, up to two years after the amendment to the articles of incorporation is registered with the competent body.
The great controversy generated in the Labor Court, however, was regarding the direction of responsibility for payment of the debt to the partners of the employing company, that is, at what procedural moment the interruption of the two-year period of the endorsement of the contractual change referring to to the withdrawal of the partner. There were jurisprudential understandings in the sense that the prescriptive framework for directing the execution to the withdrawing partner was interrupted when the labor claim was filed, others understood that the interruption occurred at the beginning of the execution and some even when the company's legal personality was disregarded. With the entry into force of Law as stated the aforementioned doubts and controversies were resolved.
Prior to the entry into force of Law the Civil Code, notably through its articles 1,003, sole paragraph, and 1,032, was used analogously to the work process to delimit the liability of the withdrawing partner, a topic that has always provoked many divergences in jurisprudence and doctrine, aiming to pacify, without success, to what Exit Mobile Number List extent or for what period this type of partner would be liable for the labor debt. From what can be inferred from both legal provisions, there is no doubt that the withdrawing partner is jointly and severally liable with the current partners for the company's debts, up to two years after the amendment to the articles of incorporation is registered with the competent body.
The great controversy generated in the Labor Court, however, was regarding the direction of responsibility for payment of the debt to the partners of the employing company, that is, at what procedural moment the interruption of the two-year period of the endorsement of the contractual change referring to to the withdrawal of the partner. There were jurisprudential understandings in the sense that the prescriptive framework for directing the execution to the withdrawing partner was interrupted when the labor claim was filed, others understood that the interruption occurred at the beginning of the execution and some even when the company's legal personality was disregarded. With the entry into force of Law as stated the aforementioned doubts and controversies were resolved.