Appeal in Special Appeal No. 1,637,397 \/ RS<\/p>\n
Minister Raul Ara\u00fajo, of the Superior Court of Justice, in a monocratic decision, in the Appeal in Special Appeal No. 1,637,397 \/ RS, heard of the appeal, to grant the special appeal, in order to remove the fine applied, based on \u00a7 4, article 1021, CPC \/ 2015, which deals with the application of a procedural fine for a manifestly inadmissible appeal.<\/p>\n
Firstly, the content of paragraph 4 of article 1021, CPC \/ 2015 should be emphasized: \u201cwhen the internal appeal is declared manifestly inadmissible or unfounded in a unanimous vote, the collegiate body, in a reasoned decision, will condemn the appellant to pay to the aggravated fine fixed between one and five percent of the updated value of the case \u201d.<\/p>\n
The specific case refers to the interlocutory appeal against a decision that dismissed a special appeal filed against the judgment of the Rio Grande do Sul State Court of Justice, in which a monocratic decision was maintained, considering the internal appeal \u201cmanifestly inadmissible and unfounded\u201d . Thus, according to the Court of origin, \u201cunjustified delay in the judicial provision, preventing the process from having a reasonable period of time\u201d, causing the application of a fine of 5% of the updated value of the case, based on Article 1021, \u00a7 4, CPC \/ 2015.<\/p>\n
In the monocratic decision, Minister Raul Ara\u00fajo understood that, in the specific case, the interposition of the internal appeal “even aimed at causing the exhaustion of the instance with a view to the future presentation of a special appeal”. Thus, supported by the jurisprudence of the STJ, it was stated that \u201cmere non-compliance with the aggravated decision does not entail the necessary imposition of a fine, provided for in \u00a7 4 of art. 1021 of CPC \/ 2015, when the inadmissibility or unfounded appeal is not configured, by unanimous decision of the collegiate \u201d.<\/p>\n
On this occasion, the precedent of the STJ (AgInt in EREsp 1.120.356 \/ RS and EDcl in REsp 1.744.495 \/ RS) was emphasized, according to which the application of this fine is not automatic, because it does not constitute \u201cmere logical consequence failure to provide for the internal appeal in a unanimous vote \u201d. On the contrary, based on an examination of the particularities of the specific case, it is essential to establish, through a reasoned decision, that \u201cthe internal grievance is manifestly inadmissible or that its groundlessness is so evident that the simple filing of the appeal can be considered as abusive or delaying \u201d.<\/p>\n
By: Wilson Sales Belchior<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Appeal in Special Appeal No. 1,637,397 \/ RS Minister Raul Ara\u00fajo, of the Superior Court of Justice, in a monocratic decision, in the Appeal in Special Appeal No. 1,637,397 \/ RS, heard of the appeal, to grant the special appeal, in order to remove the fine applied, based on \u00a7 4, article 1021, CPC \/ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1826,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1825","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-advocacia-nos-tribunais-superiores"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n