Clipping of news on Brazilian Culture, Law and Citizenship
04/29/2016
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.
transparent image
Source: STJ
Undue note held by the lender in default of registration, where the individual has previous record in the credit protection agencies, does not generate compensation for moral damages. In these situations, it is guaranteed the individual the right to request cancellation of negativity.
The thesis was defined by the Second Section of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), in a trial held on Wednesday (27) in the rite of repetitive appeals. The decision on repetitive (issue 922) is expected to base judgments on similar resources in the Brazilian courts.
Extension
The relator, Paul of Tarsus Sanseverino, had presented vote to ensure the right to compensation for erroneous negative results, although there were valid prior registration. "Even overindebted or previous customers and existing negative cadastre issues have honor and suffer moral damage", he defended the minister
However, most ministers understood that section should be extended to the lending institutions the application of Precedent 385 of the STJ. According to the entry, not for moral damages when there is irregular entry in the credit protection registry, if the injured have pre-existing legitimate negativity. "The well tutored, improper registration, is impaired by previous negativações," the Minister Luis Felipe Solomon.
Pendencies
In the original action, a student asked for compensation for moral damages the body credit due to the launch of debt in their name in the Credit Protection Service (SPC). According to the author, the negativity prevented him from open university bank account.
The ruling ordered the cancellation of improper registration, but pulled back the right to receive compensation. The judge noted that the student had 15 other outstanding debts on your behalf, there being, in this case, the characterization of moral constraint. The sentence was upheld by the second instance, the Court of Justice of Minas Gerais (Minas Gerais Appeal Court).
Precedent 385
To the court, the defense claimed that student Precedent 385 of the Superior Court concerns only the bodies responsible for credit protection records, such as SPC and Serasa. As the action pointed to the entity credit as defendant company, the defense understood as legitimate the claim for compensation
After defining the thesis adopted for the repetitive, with the expansion of entities subject to Precedent 385, the Second Section denied the author's appeal. The decision was taken by majority vote of the council.
This news refers to the (s) procedure (s): Resp 1386424
Source: STJ
To access the STJ site, click here.
Our news are taken in full of our partner sites. For this reason, we can not change their content even in cases of typographical errors.
This article was translated by an automatic translation system, and was therefore not reviewed by people.