Post by account_disabled on Mar 13, 2024 0:12:01 GMT -5
The court responsible for the judicial recovery of a company has jurisdiction to execute net credits determined in other judicial bodies, including in relation to the allocation of appeal deposits made within the scope of labor proceedings.
The 2nd Section of the Superior Court of Justice used this understanding when deciding unanimously in favor of a judicial recovery court in São Paulo in a conflict of jurisdiction that also involved a labor court in Salvador.
The company claimed in the documents that its request for judicial recovery was granted by the São Paulo court, which ordered the suspension of all executions being processed against it. However, after the decision, the Salvador labor court authorized the withdrawal of amounts related to an appeal deposit, with the argument that this amount would not form part of the assets of the recovering company, as the deposit was made before the recovery was granted.
The company then claimed to the STJ that the amounts belonged to it and, therefore, only the judicial recovery court could decide on their destination.
The rapporteur of the conflict, Minister B2B Lead Isabel Gallotti, cited in her vote a precedent from the 2nd Section in the judgment of CC 32.836 , in which the collegiate, by majority, decided on the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court to resolve the request to withdraw the appeal deposit made by the bankrupt company , employer, in the labor proceedings.
The minister stated that, after the enactment of Law 11,101/2005, the decisions made by the section involving companies in recovery started to follow this same understanding. She recalled that, as provided for in the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT), the admission of appeals filed in labor demands is conditioned on the prior deposit of the amount of the sentence, in gradual limits, according to the filing of the appeals, up to a maximum amount.
"In the scope of the Labor Court, the deposit is a prerequisite for the admissibility of appeals filed against sentences in which there is a monetary conviction, with two purposes: to guarantee execution and to avoid delaying appeals", argued the minister.
Labor reform
Gallotti explained that, with the labor reform (Law 13,467/2017), the CLT began to determine that the appeal deposit must be made in an account linked to the court and corrected with the same savings rates, no longer being made in a linked account to the FGTS on behalf of the worker.
Therefore, once the deposit has been made, the amount is available to the labor court and can be withdrawn immediately by order, immediately after the final judgment, in favor of the winning party.
However, the minister considered that "in cases where judicial recovery is granted to the company complained of during the course of the demand, the credits prior to the request are renewed, obliging the debtor and all creditors subject to it, by express provision of article 59 of Law 11,101/2005". The minister added that article 49 of the same law provides that all credits existing on the date of the request, even if not due, are subject to judicial recovery.
"The credit sought in the labor demand in progress on the date of the request is, therefore, subject to the effects of recovery, and must be paid under the terms of the approved plan, under equal conditions with other creditors of the same class", emphasized the rapporteur.
Isabel Gallotti highlighted that, considering that the labor appeal deposit has the nature of a guarantee, and not an advance payment, it is not possible for the labor court to authorize the withdrawal of the amounts deposited by a company undergoing judicial recovery, as the Court's jurisdiction is of Labor limited to the investigation of the respective credit and, after its settlement, the qualification in the general list of creditors. With information from the STJ press office .