The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has changed its understanding and since 2021 has repeatedly ruled that the termination of proceedings due to the intervening statute of limitations prevents the award of any costs to the parties. In other words, in cases where the plaintiff has not located assets subject to seizure, the right to continue with the action is lost (intervening statute of limitations) and, for this reason, there is no award of attorney's fees. This determination is provided for in article 921, paragraph 5 of the CPC, which determines that no burden is applied to the parties in these cases.

On this point, there is a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADIN) underway at the Federal Supreme Court (STF) to discuss the constitutionality of this procedural provision, but there is still no date for a judgment. Until then, the situation seems to us to be well defined by the STJ in favor of the full application of the provisions of article 921, paragraph 5 of the STJ and the non-incidence of attorney's fees in these situations.

RESP 2.025.303, reported by Minister Nancy Andrighi.

Priscila Telio – Coordinator – Litigation

Luchesi Lawyers

With a history spanning over 30 years, we are a reference in providing specialized legal services to clients in the agro-industrial production chain and other sectors of the industry. Our activity has been recognized nationally and internationally and stands out for the innovative way in which we handle consultancy issues, contractual negotiations, as well as litigation and strategic operations in agribusiness.