Resultados de busca

This scientific article aims to analyze the differences between non-existent and null sentences, highlighting their legal consequences in the context of the hypotheses for the appropriateness of the rescission action for offense to the legal norm. The legal and doctrinal foundations that support the existence of these categories will be addressed, as well as the practical implications that arise from each of them, especially with regard to the possibility of rescinding these sentences. Judicial sentences play a fundamental role in the legal system, guaranteeing the effectiveness of law in a society. However, not all sentences are valid, and it is important to distinguish between nonexistent and null sentences. In this article, we will examine the differences between these categories, their legal consequences and, specifically, we will discuss the possibility of using rescissory action as a means of rescinding judgments that offended legal norms. 1. Nonexistent Sentences: Non-existent judgments are those that lack legal existence since their delivery. They are considered null from the beginning, since they violate essential requirements for the validity of the judicial decision, such as absolute competence, form or essential element of the act. In this context, the rescission action is not applicable, as these sentences do not produce any effect in the legal system. 2. Null Sentences: Null sentences, in turn, have legal existence, but were handed down with some defect that makes them invalid. In these cases, it is possible to use the rescission action as a means of rescinding these judgments when there is a direct or frontal offense against a legal rule, provided that a period of two years is observed from the final and unappealable decision. Rescissory action allows a null judgment to be effectively rescinded and its legal result undone. 3. Hypotheses of Pertinence of Rescissory Action for Offense to Legal Standard: A rescission action for violating the legal norm is an exceptional measure that aims to correct serious and manifest errors committed in judicial decisions. The hypotheses for this action are provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure and require that the sentence has directly offended legal or constitutional provisions, causing damage to the parties involved. These hypotheses must be interpreted in a restrictive way, guaranteeing legal certainty and the stability of judicial decisions. 4. Legal Consequences and Practical Implications: Non-existent judgments, as they are not valid from the outset, do not generate effects in the legal system, and it is not necessary to formally annul them. On the other hand, null sentences, although they have a legal existence, can be rescinded through rescission action, if the violation of the legal norm is proven. It is important to emphasize that the rescission of a null judgment does not necessarily imply the invalidity of all decisions taken based on it, requiring a thorough examination of the case in question. Conclusion: The judgments judged by the Judiciary can be classified as non-existent or null, each with its particularities and legal consequences. While non-existent judgments are not valid from the outset, null judgments have legal existence, but may be subject to rescission action if there is a direct offense to the legal norm. The use of rescission action is an exceptional measure, which aims to correct serious and manifest errors committed in judicial decisions. The in-depth study of the legal and doctrinal foundations related to these categories and the rescission action contributes to a better understanding of the legal consequences and practical implications arising from non-existent, null sentences and their possibility of rescission for violating the legal norm.

The promise to buy and sell land without approval from public bodies is a complex issue in the field of real estate law, raising questions about its validity and legal consequences. In this article, we will address in a concatenated and legal way the main points related to this topic, presenting arguments and analyzes based on jurisprudential understandings. 1. Legal Basis: To understand the promise to buy and sell land without approval, it is necessary to refer to the Brazilian Civil Code, more specifically to article 1.417. This legal device establishes that the promise of purchase and sale is a preliminary contract that creates obligations for both parties, with a view to a future purchase and sale agreement. However, the validity of this contract is subject to the approval of the land by the competent bodies. 2. Precarious Possession: In the context of promising to buy and sell land without approval, both buyer and seller face poor tenure. This means that they are in possession of the land but do not have the legal documentation that proves their ownership. Therefore, both are in a situation of uncertainty regarding the legal security of the property. 3. Temporal Lapse and Usucapion: In cases of promise to buy and sell land without approval, the buyer may seek the acquisition of the land through the institute of adverse possession. It is a means of acquiring property through prolonged possession of the asset, as long as the legal requirements are met. However, it is essential to note that the time period required for adverse possession varies according to the type of adverse possession applicable to the case. In the case of land without approval, extraordinary adverse possession may be a viable option, demanding the quiet and peaceful possession of the land for at least 15 years. 4. Regularization and REURB: In turn, the seller of land without approval has the possibility of seeking regularization with the competent bodies. An alternative is the Urban Land Regularization (REURB), provided for in Law No. 13,465/2017. The REURB aims to promote the legal regularization of informal urban centers, providing legal security to the occupants of these lands. Through this procedure, the seller can obtain the necessary approvals and documentation to regularize the land and, consequently, make the purchase and sale promise valid. 5. Position of the STJ: With regard to the statute of limitations and decay in the promise to buy and sell land without approval, there is no specific position adopted by the Superior Court of Justice (STJ). It is up to the lower courts to analyze previous judgments of the STJ and apply these precedents in similar cases. It is important to emphasize that each case must be treated individually, considering its particularities and the arguments presented by the parties involved. Conclusion: The promise of buying and selling land without approval from public bodies brings legal challenges and uncertainties as to its validity. Both the buyer and the seller find themselves in precarious possession, without full legal security over the ownership of the land. The buyer may seek acquisition through adverse possession, provided that the legal requirements are met, such as the minimum period of peaceful and peaceful possession. On the other hand, the seller can seek to regularize the land through the REURB, obtaining the necessary approvals and documents. It should be noted that the position of the STJ in relation to the prescription and decay of the promise to buy and sell land without approval is not defined, demanding the analysis of previous cases by the lower courts. In short, the promise to buy and sell land without approval requires a careful analysis, considering the legal basis, the jurisprudence, the time lapse necessary for the acquisition by adverse possession, the possibility of regularization by the REURB and the lack of a definitive position of the STJ.

This article aims to analyze in more detail the changes introduced by Law 12.112/2009 in the leasing legislation and how these changes have been interpreted by the courts, with a main focus on the divergent and convergent position of the Superior Court of Justice ( STJ) on the highlighted points, highlighting their consequences and possible solutions found. Law 12,112/2009 brought significant changes to leasing legislation, with the aim of modernizing the rules and balancing the relationship between landlords and tenants. In this article, we will make a deeper analysis on how these changes have been applied in practice, considering the divergent and convergent positions of the courts, especially the STJ, addressing their consequences and possible solutions. 2. Extension of the Minimum Residential Lease Period One of the most controversial changes introduced by Law 12,112/2009 was the extension of the minimum term of residential lease, which went from 30 to 36 months. This measure has generated discussions about its constitutionality, as it restricts the contractual freedom of the parties. Some lower court decisions understand that such a restriction is illegal, while others defend the validity of the amendment. Regarding the STJ, there is a consolidated understanding that the amendment is valid and seeks to provide greater security for both the lessor and the lessee. Possibility of Guarantee with Bond Insurance Another significant change brought about by the law is the possibility of using surety insurance as a rental guarantee. This amendment has been well received by case law, as it offers practicality and legal certainty to the parties involved. However, in some cases, disagreements arise between the courts regarding the possibility of the landlord requiring other forms of guarantee, in addition to surety insurance. The understanding pacified by the STJ is that surety insurance is valid as a form of guarantee, but does not prevent other modalities from being agreed between the parties. Eviction Rule Changes Law 12,112/2009 also brought changes to the eviction rules, seeking to streamline the procedure for vacating the property in cases of default or breach of contractual obligations. However, the application of these new rules has generated disagreements in the courts regarding the interpretation and scope of the changes. Among these divergences, discussions about deadlines and necessary requirements stand out for granting the eviction. The STJ has sought to resolve these differences, consolidating understandings that guarantee procedural efficiency and speed, without harming the rights of the parties involved. Reflections on the Practice and Positioning of the STJ Changes in the Lease Law have generated several reflections in practice, causing divergences and convergences between the courts. In the context of the STJ, the court's position has been fundamental to establish guidelines and standardize understandings on these controversial points, such as the extension of the minimum term of residential lease, the use of surety insurance as a guarantee and changes in the eviction rules. /p> Conclusion: Law 12.112/2009 promoted important changes in the leasing legislation, but also generated divergences and convergences between the courts. In this article, we seek to clarify how these changes have been interpreted in practice, emphasizing jurisprudential divergences and convergences, especially with regard to the positions of the STJ. It is critical that those involved in tenancy relationships are aware of these changes and the solutions found by the courts, in order to ensure correct and fair application of the law.

This article aims to analyze the arbitral award, its effects, the issue of non-appealability and its validity as a judicial enforceable instrument. For this, the legal and jurisprudential bases will be analyzed and, mainly, the position of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) regarding this subject. Arbitration is a dispute resolution method widely adopted by parties involved in disputes, offering speed, confidentiality and expertise in conflict resolution. The arbitral award, issued by the arbitral tribunal, is the instrument through which the dispute is decided. In this context, the discussion about the effects, non-appealability and validity of the arbitral award as a judicially enforceable title is relevant and current. The Arbitration Award and its Effects: The arbitration award has a jurisdictional nature, being endowed with decision-making effectiveness for the parties involved in the dispute. Its effects are equivalent to those of a sentence handed down by the Judiciary, and must be duly complied with by the parties. In addition, doctrine and jurisprudence have recognized the broad effectiveness of the arbitral award, allowing its execution in several countries, including through international conventions. The non-appealability of the arbitral award: The Brazilian legislation advocates the non-appealability of the arbitral award, limiting the possibilities of challenge. Only in exceptional cases, provided for in the Arbitration Law (Law No. 9,307/1996), is it permitted to file an annulment action against the arbitral award before the Judiciary. However, it is important to highlight that irrevocability does not affect the effectiveness and validity of the arbitral award as a judicially enforceable title. The Validity of the Arbitral Award as a Judicial Enforcement Title: The arbitration award, provided that it meets the legal requirements and is in accordance with the procedure established by law, is considered a judicially enforceable title, pursuant to article 515, item VII, of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). In this way, the arbitral award can be enforced like any other judicial enforceable title, allowing the creditor to seek the satisfaction of its credit before the Judiciary. The Position of the STJ: The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) plays a fundamental role in defining the understanding regarding the validity of the arbitral award as a judicial enforceable instrument. In several decisions, the STJ has reinforced the enforceable nature of the arbitral award, consolidating its position in favor of its validity as a judicial enforceable title and recognizing the effectiveness of arbitration as an alternative method of conflict resolution. Conclusion: In view of the above, it is concluded that the arbitral award plays an important role in the resolution of disputes, having legal effects equivalent to those of the court decision. The non-appealability of the arbitral award does not affect its validity as a judicially enforceable title, and its execution before the Judiciary is fully possible. The position of the STJ has reinforced the validity of the arbitral award as a judicial enforceable title, guaranteeing the legal certainty necessary for the use of this conflict resolution mechanism. Thus, it is essential that lawyers and legal practitioners are up to date on this topic, in order to better guide their clients and ensure the effectiveness of arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has developed rapidly in recent years, bringing with it a number of opportunities and challenges. However, the lack of adequate regulation can generate ethical and practical problems that need to be addressed. This article addresses AI contexts, how lack of regulation can create a "lawless land" and the regulations needed to prevent these problems broadly and comprehensively. Such as ethics and governance, transparency, explainability with a view to responsible, safe and ethical use of AI and/or legal accountability, cybersecurity and monitoring and auditing, in addition to its positive effects as well as the negative consequences that AI can bring, a as its capacity for self-learning and constant evolution can surpass even the most optimistic expectations. Artificial intelligence can be defined as the ability of a machine or computational system to perform tasks that require human intelligence, such as understanding natural language, recognizing objects, making decisions and solving complex problems. This technology has been developing rapidly and has gained space in several areas, such as medicine, transportation, education, entertainment and industry. 1. Context: The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence and the lack of regulation Artificial intelligence has advanced impressively, opening doors to new possibilities in various sectors. However, this rapid evolution also brings challenges, especially with regard to ethics and safety. Lack of proper regulation can lead to a "lawless land" where AI is used without accountability, resulting in possible abuse and negative consequences. Positive points of Artificial Intelligence: AI has the potential to bring countless benefits to society. For example, it can automate routine and repetitive tasks, allowing human beings to focus on more creative and higher value-added activities. In addition, AI can improve the accuracy and speed of medical diagnosis, help predict and prevent natural disasters, optimize industrial production, increase safety in autonomous vehicles, and improve human-machine interaction. AI Global Effects and Offsets: AI has the potential to make a significant impact on the world stage. Its widespread use in many areas can improve people's quality of life, increase economic efficiency and transform the way we live and work. However, there are also concerns that AI could lead to societal problems, such as mass unemployment due to job automation, a widening divide between those who have access to the technology and those who don't, and the creation of autonomous weapons without adequate human control. Self-learning and constant evolution: One of the most fascinating characteristics of AI is its ability to learn and evolve. By using advanced algorithms and large amounts of data, AI systems can improve their performance over time, becoming more efficient and accurate in their decision-making. However, this autonomy can also lead to unintended consequences, as systems can develop harmful biases and act unpredictably. Unpredictable consequences and predictions: While AI has the potential to bring significant benefits, it is also important to consider its unintended consequences. The lack of regulation by law in the area of AI can allow the commission of crimes, such as unfair competition, invasion of privacy and plagiarism. Furthermore, the rapid advancement of AI and its ability to surpass human capabilities in certain areas may raise ethical and societal issues that have yet to be fully explored and understood. 2. Problems arising from the lack of regulation: The lack of regulation in the area of artificial intelligence can generate a series of ethical and practical problems. Without clear guidelines, developers can create biased AI systems, reproducing biases and discriminating against certain groups. Furthermore, the absence of regulation makes it difficult to be held accountable in cases of damage caused by AI failures or misuse of systems. There are also cybersecurity concerns, as the lack of guidelines can leave AI systems vulnerable to attacks and intrusions. Within the context of artificial intelligence, the lack of adequate regulation can generate a series of ethical as well as practical problems. It is essential to implement regulations that guide the use of AI in a responsible, transparent and safe way. Here are some regulations that would be interesting and necessary to avoid a "lawless land": 1. Ethics and governance: Regulations should establish sound ethical principles that guide the development and use of AI. These principles should ensure that AI is used to benefit society as a whole, avoiding discrimination, injustice and human rights violations. One example is the creation of ethics committees that can review and approve AI projects based on established criteria. 2. Transparency and explainability: Regulations should require AI systems to be transparent and understandable. This means that algorithms and models must be explained in a clear and accessible way, so that users and stakeholders can understand how decisions are made. Transparency should also cover data collection and use, ensuring that personal information is handled securely and in accordance with privacy laws. 3. Legal responsibility: Regulations should establish a clear division of responsibilities between developers, suppliers and users of AI systems . This is important to ensure that, in the event of damages or violations of rights, there is a legal framework in place to hold the parties involved accountable. It is also necessary to define the limits of responsibility and the level of autonomy that the AI can have. 4. Cybersecurity: Regulations should include guidelines and standards to ensure the security and protection of AI systems from attacks cyber. This involves measures such as data encryption, protection against hacking and ensuring the integrity of systems. 5. Monitoring and auditing: Regulations should establish monitoring and auditing mechanisms that allow continuous assessment of the performance and impact of AI systems. This helps identify potential issues, algorithmic biases, and negative impacts on society. The creation of specialized regulatory bodies is also a possibility, to ensure compliance with established laws and regulations. It is important to note that regulations must be updated regularly to keep pace with technological advances and emerging challenges. Furthermore, a collaborative effort between governments, industry experts, academia and civil society is needed to develop and implement these regulations in an appropriate and balanced way, ensuring the benefits of AI without compromising the safety and well-being of society. 3. Regulations needed to avoid a "lawless land To avoid a "lawless land" in the use of artificial intelligence, it is essential to establish adequate regulations. Several points should be considered, such as ethics and governance, transparency and explainability, legal responsibility, cybersecurity and monitoring and auditing. Ethically, regulations must ensure that AI is used fairly, without discriminating against groups or violating human rights. Ethics committees can be created to analyze and approve AI projects, taking into account the established criteria. Transparency and explainability are essential to ensure the trust of users and stakeholders. Regulations should require algorithms and models to be clearly explained, allowing decisions made by AI systems to be understood. The protection of personal data must also be addressed in these regulations. Legal responsibility is a crucial point. Regulations must clearly establish the responsibilities of developers, providers and users of AI systems, ensuring a fair system for dealing with damages and violations of rights. Boundaries of responsibility and autonomy must also be defined. Cybersecurity must be addressed through guidelines and standards that ensure the protection of AI systems from attacks. Measures such as data encryption, protection against hacking and systems integrity must be considered. Finally, monitoring and auditing mechanisms need to be established to continuously assess the performance and impact of AI systems. Specialized regulatory bodies can be created to ensure compliance with established laws and regulations. Conclusion: In a scenario where artificial intelligence develops rapidly, the lack of adequate regulation can generate ethical and practical problems. It is essential to implement regulations that guide the use of AI in a responsible, transparent and safe way. The regulations discussed, such as ethics and governance, transparency and explainability, legal accountability, cybersecurity, and monitoring and auditing, are examples of measures that can help prevent a "lawless land". Collaboration between governments, industry experts, academia and civil society is essential to develop and implement these regulations in an appropriate and balanced way. Regulation of artificial intelligence is necessary to ensure the benefits of this technology, while protecting society from potential negative consequences. It is critical to implement regulations to guide the responsible, transparent and safe use of AI. The regulations discussed address ethics and governance, transparency and explainability, legal accountability, cybersecurity, and monitoring and auditing. Collaboration between governments, experts, academia and civil society is essential to develop and implement appropriate and balanced regulations. AI regulation is necessary to ensure benefits and minimize risks to society. After all, each and every revolution brings new challenges and adaptations.

This article aims to analyze the effects and guarantees of incorporation and allocation in comparison to a Special Purpose Entity (SPE), highlighting the difference between these modalities in relation to communication with the main company (head office) of the entrepreneur in cases of future execution, whether due to the property under construction or debts of the entrepreneur for other obligations, including bankruptcy situations. For this, the legal foundations, case law and the understanding of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) on the subject will be addressed. Incorporation and allocation and SPEs are institutes used in the real estate market, seeking to provide guarantees and security to property developers and buyers. A comparative study of these institutes will be carried out, emphasizing their differences and analyzing their legal support through jurisprudence. 2. Embedding and Affectation: Effects and Positivity 2.1 Legal Rationale Law No. 4591/1964 (Real Estate Development Law) and Law No. 10931/2004 (Fiduciary Alienation Law) are the main legal bases on which incorporation and allocation are based. These laws grant legal effects and guarantees to entrepreneurs and buyers, such as individualization of assets and non-seizability of affectation assets. 2.2 Jurisprudence Seeking to support the analysis of the positivity of incorporation and allocation, it is essential to consider the divergences. The court has consolidated understandings related to the protection of the rights of buyers in cases of default or bankruptcy of the entrepreneur. Among the main jurisprudential decisions, as recommended by article 833, item XII, however, it must be weighed against the specific case. 3. Special Purpose Entity (SPE) 3.1 Concept and Characteristics The SPE is a management modality used to operate specific enterprises, separating them from the entrepreneur's main company. SPEs have their own characteristics, such as the separation of assets and autonomy in relation to the main company. 3.2 Comparison with Incorporation and Allocation It is essential to highlight the differences between SPEs and incorporation and allocation. While incorporation and allocation are based on specific legislation, SPEs are governed by contractual and statutory provisions. In addition, communication with the entrepreneur's main company is a relevant aspect to be considered. In the case of incorporation and allocation, the main company is protected by asset individualization, preventing problems related to other projects from impacting on a given project. However, in SPEs, the separation of assets may be less robust, allowing any debts or obligations of the main company to directly affect specific projects. Conclusion: The adoption of incorporation and allocation, as provided for in Brazilian legislation, provides effects and guarantees to both the entrepreneur and the buyer of real estate, aiming to provide legal certainty to the contractual relationship. The analysis of jurisprudence in relation to these modalities is relevant to base the performance of the actors involved in the real estate market. On the other hand, the use of an SPE can bring certain advantages in terms of management, but it is important to consider its limitation in relation to communication with the entrepreneur's main company in cases of future execution. Understanding the differences between these modalities is essential for proper and conscious decision-making by both entrepreneurs and property buyers.

This article aims at the legal and procedural aspects of extrajudicial adverse possession, analyzing its importance as an efficient alternative for the regularization of properties. The requirements, the steps of the procedure and the recent legislative and jurisprudential updates related to the subject will be addressed. Extrajudicial adverse possession, regulated by Law nº 13.105/2015 (Code of Civil Procedure), has been presented as a facilitating instrument for the regularization of properties. This procedure, which dispenses with the intervention of the Judiciary, establishes a more agile and less bureaucratic way to obtain property by adverse possession. 2. Extrajudicial Usucaption Requirements In order to carry out extrajudicial adverse possession, it is necessary to meet the general requirements of adverse possession, such as calm, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of the property for a certain period of time, absence of opposition from third parties and proof of just title. In addition, it is imperative that the property is duly registered with the competent notary. 3. Extrajudicial Procedure The procedure for extrajudicial adverse possession begins with the preparation of a notarial act, drawn up by the notary public. These minutes are intended to verify the presence of all those involved and their agreement with the adverse possession request. This document will serve as a title to be presented at the real estate registry office, where the analysis and enforcement of the adverse possession will be carried out. 4. The Importance of the Notary Public's Performance The notary public plays an extremely important role in the out-of-court procedure of adverse possession. It is up to him to verify the correct documentation presented, the manifestation of the will of the interested parties and the existence of the necessary legal requirements. In addition, the notary has the power to refuse the request for adverse possession if legal elements are missing and must register this refusal in a notarial act. 5. Legislative and Jurisprudential Updates The jurisprudence has focused on important issues related to extrajudicial adverse possession, seeking the correct interpretation and application of the law. Among these discussions, the waiver of the consent of the spouse or partner, proof of ownership and analysis of documentation stand out. The consolidation of jurisprudential understandings has contributed to legal certainty and the effectiveness of extrajudicial adverse possession. Conclusion: Extrajudicial adverse possession has proven to be a viable and efficient alternative for the regularization of properties, as long as the legal and procedural requirements are obeyed. Through the action of the notary public, the process is simplified, ensuring speed and legal certainty. The harmonization of jurisprudential understandings has contributed to the consolidation of this important tool in the context of land regularization.

This article aims to analyze in more detail the changes introduced by the Law 12.112/2009 in the leasing legislation and how these changes have been interpreted by the courts, with a main focus on the divergent and convergent position of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) on the highlighted points, highlighting their consequences and possible solutions found. Law 12,112/2009 brought significant changes to leasing legislation, with the aim of modernizing the rules and balancing the relationship between landlords and tenants. In this article, we will make a deeper analysis on how these changes have been applied in practice, considering the divergent and convergent positions of the courts, especially the STJ, addressing their consequences and possible solutions. 2. Extension of the Minimum Residential Lease Period One of the most controversial changes introduced by Law 12,112/2009 was the extension of the minimum residential lease term, which went from 30 to 36 months. This measure has generated discussions about its constitutionality, as it restricts the contractual freedom of the parties. Some lower court decisions understand that such a restriction is illegal, while others defend the validity of the amendment. Regarding the STJ, there is a consolidated understanding that the amendment is valid and seeks to provide greater security for both the lessor and the lessee. Possibility of Guarantee with Surety Bond Another significant change brought about by the law is the possibility of using bail insurance as a rental guarantee. This amendment has been well received by case law, as it offers practicality and legal certainty to the parties involved. However, in some cases, disagreements arise between the courts regarding the possibility of the landlord requiring other forms of guarantee, in addition to surety insurance. The understanding pacified by the STJ is that surety insurance is valid as a form of guarantee, but does not prevent other modalities from being agreed between the parties. Eviction Rule Changes Law 12,112/2009 also brought changes to the eviction rules, seeking to streamline the procedure for vacating the property in cases of default or breach of contractual obligations. However, the application of these new rules has generated disagreements in the courts regarding the interpretation and scope of the changes. Among these disagreements, discussions about deadlines and necessary requirements for granting the eviction stand out. The STJ has sought to resolve these differences, consolidating understandings that guarantee procedural efficiency and speed, without harming the rights of the parties involved. Reflections on the Practice and Positioning of the STJ Changes in the Lease Law have generated several reflections in practice, causing divergences and convergences between the courts. In the context of the STJ, the court's position has been fundamental to establish guidelines and standardize understandings on these controversial points, such as the extension of the minimum term of residential lease, the use of surety insurance as a guarantee and changes in the eviction rules. /p> Conclusion: Law 12.112/2009 promoted important changes in the leasing legislation, but also generated divergences and convergences between the courts. In this article, we seek to clarify how these changes have been interpreted in practice, emphasizing jurisprudential divergences and convergences, especially with regard to the positions of the STJ. It is critical that those involved in tenancy relationships are aware of these changes and the solutions found by the courts, in order to ensure correct and fair application of the law.

In recent years, the dispute over the collection of condominium fees has become a recurrent theme in the life of condominium members. In this article, we will explore the legal aspects involved in disputes, as well as present alternative solutions for their resolution. It is important to emphasize that the collection of the condominium fee is supported by legal grounds and its contribution is essential for the maintenance of the common areas and services provided by the condominium. 1. Condominium collection: legal basis and obligation The collection of condominium tax is supported by the Civil Code, more specifically, the articles 1,336 to 1,343 establish that two condominium members must contribute with the condominium expenses. In addition, the Condominium Law (Law No. 4,591/64) also provided for the obligation to pay common expenses. According to article 1.336, item I of the Civil Code, the condominium member is obliged to contribute to the common expenses of the condominium in proportion to his ideal fraction, unless otherwise provided in the condominium contract. This contribution is essential to ensure the maintenance and conservation of common areas, as well as the provision of essential services to tenants. 2. Disagreements with IPTU collection Disagreements will often arise between the tenants and the condominium administrator regarding the collection of IPTU. condominium. An example could be a discrepancy in relation to the amount charged. In these cases, it is important to verify that the calculation is correct and that the condominium contract or the meetings authorize increases in expenses. There may also be questions about the fate of two seized resources. In these cases, the unit owners have the right to demand transparency and accountability from the liquidator and administrator. Also, delays in payment are grounds for dispute. The condominium member who does not pay the condominium may be sued in court and subject to fines and juries, as established in the convention or in the assemblies. It is important to comment that the discussion on the validation and value of the collection in the condominium assemblies is of extreme importance, it is forwarded to a space of democracy and active participation of the condominium members. 3. Responsibility of the trustee and administrator in the collection of the condominium The trustee is responsible for the administration of the condominium and for the collection of the fee condominium. It must act in accordance with the legal provisions and contractual clauses in force. The administrator, in turn, provides support to the trustee in the performance of his duties and in the financial management of the condominium. Both have the duty to ensure the correct collection of the condominium, in accordance with the convention and the resolutions taken at the meeting. 4. Judicial and jurisprudential decisions The jurisprudence has favored the collection of condominium fees, recognizing its obligation and importance for the maintenance of common areas. For example, Special Appeal No. 1,289,439/MG, or the Superior Court of Justice decided that the condominium fee is legitimate and must be carried out in accordance with legal and conventional provisions. In addition, in numerous cases, the courts have recognized the legality of two hectares of juries and fines in cases of late payment of the condominium, highlighting the importance of encouraging or fulfilling condominium obligations. 5. Alternative solutions and preventive measures To avoid litigation and seek an amicable solution to disputes related to the collection of condominium taxes, recommended or use of extrajudicial methods such as mediation and conciliation. Mediation is a process conducted by an impartial mediator, who helps the parties to identify common interests and reach an agreement. Conciliation, on the other hand, involves the participation of a conciliator, who facilitates communication between the parties and seeks a solution that is satisfactory to all. Through these methods it is possible to build a dialogue between the owners and an administrator, promoting the understanding of the interests and needs of each one. In this way, the solution found will be more efficient and lasting, thus avoiding emotional and financial exhaustion. As a preventive measure, it is important to hold meetings periodically so that owners can discuss and resolve any doubts and disagreements. In addition, it is recommended that clear rules be established, which transparently determine the revenue and operation of the condominium, including the form of collection and allocation of resources. Conclusion: A dispute over the collection of condominium tax can be resolved harmoniously and efficiently, understanding that this contribution is essential for the maintenance of common areas and services provided by the condominium. Mediation and conciliation stand out as viable alternatives for conflict resolution, stimulating a constructive dialogue between the parties involved. It is fundamental that the tenants are aware of their rights and duties, actively participating in the management of the condominium. Preventive measures, such as holding assemblies and implementing clear regulations, can also help to avoid conflicts and not establish a harmonious and fair coexistence. Attention: everyone's collaboration is essential for the condominium to function properly and to obtain a harmonious environment.

The civil liability of the builder for defects in construction is a relevant topic within the field of civil law, since it involves the obligation to repair damage caused by defects or defects in buildings. In this approach, it is essential to analyze the concepts of contractual and strict liability, identify the types of defects in construction and discuss the appropriate measures to repair damage caused to owners or purchasers. 1. Constructor's contractual and strict liability: Within the civil liability of the builder, it is important to highlight the distinction between contractual liability and strict liability. Contractual liability stems from non-compliance with contractual clauses, while strict liability is the one in which the builder is held liable regardless of fault, due to the nature of the risks inherent in construction activities. 2. Types of construction defects: Construction defects can be classified into different categories, including: - Apparent vices: are defects that can be identified by an ordinary person, without the need for technical knowledge. May include visible cracks, leaks, electrical or plumbing problems. - Hidden vices: are defects that are not immediately noticeable, requiring a more detailed analysis or the occurrence of certain conditions to be identified. These include structural problems, foundation failures, and more. - Design or execution defects: relate to design or execution errors in construction, such as poorly designed projects, inadequate materials, poor execution of services, among others. 3. Measures to repair damage caused: To ensure repair of damage caused by defects in construction, some measures can be applied, such as: - Complaint to the builder: the owner or purchaser must notify the builder of the defects found, demanding that repairs be carried out or the corresponding compensation. - Technical report: hiring a specialized professional to carry out a detailed technical assessment is essential to identify defects in the construction and base repair measures. - Lawsuit: If the builder refuses to carry out repairs or compensate adequately, the owner or acquirer can seek compensation for damages through a lawsuit. 4. Importance of builder civil liability for construction defects: The civil liability of the builder for defects in the construction plays a fundamental role in protecting the rights of owners or purchasers of real estate. It guarantees the safety, quality and durability of buildings, in addition to encouraging the competence and responsibility of construction professionals. Therefore, laws and regulations must be strictly applied in order to ensure that builders comply with their legal obligations and that damage caused by defects is properly repaired. Conclusion: The civil liability of the builder for defects in the construction is a crucial aspect for the protection of the rights of the owners or acquirers and for the guarantee of a safe and quality construction. It is essential that builders are held responsible for damage caused by defects, whether through repairs, compensation or other appropriate measures. Only in this way will it be possible to promote confidence in the civil construction sector and ensure the peace of mind of those who acquire or use real estate.

The discussion about the responsibility of company administrators in cases of mismanagement is extremely important for efficiency and transparency in business. In this context, it is necessary to understand the duties and obligations of these managers, as well as the legal and ethical consequences that can arise when management does not adequately fulfill its responsibilities. 1. The role of the administrator in the company Administrators are agents responsible for managing and making strategic decisions in companies. They have an obligation to act with diligence, honesty and loyalty, acting in the best interests of the company and its stakeholders, such as shareholders, employees, customers and suppliers. 2. Duties and obligations of directors Duties of directors include: - Duty of care: they must act with the utmost diligence during management, making informed and considered decisions, based on risk analysis, adequate accounting and financial information; - Duty of loyalty: they must avoid conflicts of interest and act exclusively for the benefit of the company, avoiding any activity or behavior that could harm its reputation or cause financial damage; - Duty to inform: they must provide true and accurate information to shareholders and the market, ensuring transparency and confidence in the company's performance. 3. Consequences of poor management When administrators fail to fulfill their duties and obligations, mismanagement can have several consequences, such as: - Civil liability: administrators may respond civilly to the company and third parties for damages caused by their mismanagement. They may be required to pay compensation for the financial losses suffered; - Criminal liability: in extreme cases of mismanagement, such as fraud or financial crimes, administrators can be held criminally liable and subject to prison sentences; - Administrative liability: Regulatory bodies and oversight bodies can impose sanctions, such as fines and bans on administrators involved in mismanagement. 4. Preventive measures and corporate governance To avoid cases of mismanagement, it is essential to adopt preventive measures, such as: - Strengthen corporate governance, with good practices of transparency, accountability and responsibility for the company's results; - Establish internal control mechanisms and independent auditing to ensure the reliability of financial information; - Train and train administrators, providing technical and ethical knowledge for making appropriate decisions; - Promote a corporate culture based on integrity, ethics and compliance, to avoid situations of conflict of interest and encourage proper conduct. Conclusion: The responsibility of company administrators in case of mismanagement is a relevant topic that requires reflection on the duties and obligations of these managers. It is essential that administrators act with diligence, loyalty and transparency, fulfilling their responsibilities with diligence and ethics. In this sense, the adoption of preventive measures, the promotion of corporate governance and the culture of integrity are essential to avoid cases of mismanagement and protect the interests of the company, shareholders and other stakeholders. Legal accountability and its consequences should serve as an incentive mechanism for responsible and efficient management.

Fiduciary alienation is a very common form of guarantee in the real estate market, both for commercial and residential properties. This form of guarantee gives the creditor ownership of the property until the debt is settled, being an efficient way to ensure compliance with the contract. However, there are cases in which the construction company, responsible for the sale of the property, borrows funds from banks to finance the work and, if it does not fulfill its obligations, the property can be resold to the buyer and put up for auction according to the flexibility established by the summary. 308 of the STJ. In this text, we will address the main aspects of commercial and residential fiduciary alienation, explaining the summary 308 of the STJ and how the default of the construction company can impact the sale and auction of the property. 1. Definition of chattel mortgage: Fiduciary alienation is a mechanism in which the debtor (buyer of the property) transfers ownership of the good to the creditor (financial institution) as a guarantee of debt payment. This transfer takes place through a contract and a registration at the real estate notary, which establishes that the buyer will be considered the owner of the property only after full payment of the debt. That way, in case of default, the creditor has the right to repossess the property. 2. STJ Precedent 308 and its flexibility: Sumula 308 of the STJ says that "the mortgage signed between the construction company and the financial agent, before or after the conclusion of the promise of purchase and sale, is not effective before the purchasers of the property". This means that, in practice, the buyer of the property is not responsible for the debts between the builder and the bank, as long as this promise of purchase and sale is registered before the mortgage. 3. Default by the builder and possible withdrawal at auction: If the construction company borrows funds from banks to finance the work on the property and does not fulfill its obligations, it is possible that the property will be resold to the buyer and put up for auction. This is because, even in the face of default by the builder, the buyer can exercise his right to acquire the property, as established in summary 308 of the STJ. In this case, the buyer has the opportunity to assume the builder's financial obligations with the bank to prevent the property from being put up for auction. Conclusion: Fiduciary alienation is a form of guarantee used in the real estate market to ensure compliance with the purchase and sale contract. STJ summary 308 brings flexibility by establishing that the mortgage between the construction company and the financial agent does not affect the transfer of the property to the buyer. In case of default by the builder with the bank, the buyer has the opportunity to acquire the property directly from the bank, preventing it from being put up for auction. However, it is always important that all parties involved are aware of the contractual clauses to avoid future problems and guarantee the legal security of the business.