Post by xyz3800 on Feb 28, 2024 5:38:56 GMT -5
Laerte Codonho, owner of the Dolly beverage brand, appealed the decision of judge Sergio Serrano Nunes Filho, of the 1st Finance Court of São Paulo, who extinguished a lawsuit requesting compensation against eight state attorneys. The businessman claims to have suffered moral and material damages due to the abuse of rights in the processes that blocked around R$1.5 billion of his assets and led to his arrest in May 2018. Reproduction / SBT Businessman Laerte Codonho claims to have suffered moral and material damages due to the actions of São Paulo State prosecutors. Reproduction / SBT According to the decision that extinguished the action, the law prohibits holding public servants accountable through direct action.
The rule states that "the member of the public legal profession will be civilly and regressively liable when he acts fraudulently or fraudulently in the exercise of his duties." Which, for the judge, means that "this category of civil servants can only be held responsible for fraud or fraud and in regressive action on the part of the Treasury, if it succumbs in the initial action filed by the individual, with no Exit Mobile Number List possibility, therefore, of liability of such defendants, in the form deduced initially, as the authors intend". According to the businessman's appeal, defended by Guilherme Tilkian and Paulo Antonio Ramirez Assad, from Tilkian Marinelli Marrey Advogados , the judge did not analyze the specific case based on the jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court, applying a precedent outside the scope of the action.
The decision, say the lawyers, "was based on the fact that the STF had already decided on the impossibility of filing an action directly against the public servant, when the RE 327.904 was judged", however, they argue, "what was analyzed in that case was a factual situation completely different from the present one, which is why there is no need to talk about its application". Against the application of article 184 of the Code of Civil Procedure used by the magistrate to extinguish the action, Codonho's defense maintains that the device "only reinforces what the Federal Constitution already determines and which has already been recognized by the Courts: the power granted to the injured party to propose action against the State and/or against the public agent – the natural person causing the damage.
The rule states that "the member of the public legal profession will be civilly and regressively liable when he acts fraudulently or fraudulently in the exercise of his duties." Which, for the judge, means that "this category of civil servants can only be held responsible for fraud or fraud and in regressive action on the part of the Treasury, if it succumbs in the initial action filed by the individual, with no Exit Mobile Number List possibility, therefore, of liability of such defendants, in the form deduced initially, as the authors intend". According to the businessman's appeal, defended by Guilherme Tilkian and Paulo Antonio Ramirez Assad, from Tilkian Marinelli Marrey Advogados , the judge did not analyze the specific case based on the jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court, applying a precedent outside the scope of the action.
The decision, say the lawyers, "was based on the fact that the STF had already decided on the impossibility of filing an action directly against the public servant, when the RE 327.904 was judged", however, they argue, "what was analyzed in that case was a factual situation completely different from the present one, which is why there is no need to talk about its application". Against the application of article 184 of the Code of Civil Procedure used by the magistrate to extinguish the action, Codonho's defense maintains that the device "only reinforces what the Federal Constitution already determines and which has already been recognized by the Courts: the power granted to the injured party to propose action against the State and/or against the public agent – the natural person causing the damage.