July 2026
Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJ/SP) limits default interest on bank credit notes to 1% per month
The 7th Panel of Core 4.0 of the Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJ/SP) upheld a sentence that declared null a clause in a bank credit note that provided for the incidence of default interest calculated by the CDI rate plus 0.378477% per day, equivalent to 12.05% per month. The panel understood that, although Law No. 10,931/2004 authorizes the free agreement of remuneratory interest in bank credit notes, this freedom does not extend to default interest, which remains limited to the legal percentage of 1% per month.
In the appeal, the financial institution argued the inapplicability of the Consumer Defense Code to the contractual relationship, defended the validity of the clause as it was freely agreed upon, and claimed that Law No. 10,931/2004 authorizes the stipulation of the charges provided for in bank credit notes. It also argued that the daily capitalization of interest would be legitimate. However, the Reporting Judge rejected the allegations, highlighting that the contracting party, being a natural person and the final recipient of the banking service, fits the concept of consumer, making the protective rules of the CDC applicable.
Upon analyzing the merits, the Court differentiated remuneratory interest, incident during the regular execution of the contract, from default interest, applicable in case of default – to conclude that Law No. 10,931/2004 only allows the free agreement of the former, with no legal authorization to waive the 1% monthly cap incident in case of late payment. Thus, the nullity of the contractual clause that provided for a default charge of 12.05% per month was maintained, as it affronts public order rules, even if the contracting party had adhered to the contract’s conditions. The issue regarding the daily capitalization of interest was not assessed as it was considered an appellate innovation.
Case: 1151908-44.2024.8.26.0100
Court orders unavailability of real estate to guarantee assets of withdrawing partner
The 5th Civil Court of Jundiaí/SP ordered the registration of the existence of a lawsuit in the real estate records of properties linked to a real estate development and the precautionary unavailability of the ideal fraction of the remaining assets, to ensure the future satisfaction of the withdrawing partner’s assets. The decision was rendered after the STJ recognized that it would be up to the trial court to assess the request for precautionary relief, leading to the annulment of the sentence that had extinguished the incident due to lack of jurisdiction.
The controversy originated in a lawsuit for the dissolution of a de facto partnership formed for the development of a real estate project. In a previous judgment, the Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJ/SP) recognized the existence of the partnership and ordered an expert examination to ascertain the assets of the withdrawing partner. Faced with indications of asset depletion, the plaintiff requested precautionary relief to preserve sufficient assets for the future satisfaction of the credit.
Upon analyzing the request, the judge highlighted that the subsequent manifestation of the STJ removed any doubt regarding the jurisdiction of the court of origin to assess the precautionary measure, so maintaining the extinguishing sentence would compromise access to justice and the effectiveness of judicial relief. Verifying, then, the presence of the requirements for granting urgent relief, she considered demonstrated the probability of the right – in light of the appellate decision that recognized the de facto partnership – and the periculum in mora – from the demonstration of the risk of asset dissipation.
In this scenario, it was ordered to register the existence of the lawsuit on the properties’ deeds, the precautionary unavailability limited to the ideal fraction corresponding to the plaintiff’s share in the partnership, as well as the presentation, by the defendants, of the documentation regarding the sale of the lots and the receivables of the development. The decision emphasized that the measures have a strictly conservative character for the utility of the future liquidation of assets, and do not impose exacerbated restrictions to guarantee the effectiveness of the provision.
Case: REsp 2.218.610
Execution of undisputed extraconcursal credit is not suspended during the stay period, decides STJ Minister
Minister Raul Araújo ordered the continuation of the execution of an extrajudicial title, filed against a company under judicial reorganization, based on a credit guaranteed by fiduciary alienation – and, therefore, extraconcursal. The decision rejected the intention to suspend the execution during the stay period, due to the undisputed character of the credit’s nature.
The controversy originated in the execution of an extrajudicial title filed by a financial institution against a company later subjected to judicial reorganization. After the approval of the reorganization processing, the trial court suspended the execution due to the start of the stay period, but later reconsidered the decision upon recognizing the extraconcursal nature of the credit. On appeal, however, the Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJ/SP) ordered the suspension of the execution until the reorganization court declared the nature of the credit, in addition to establishing that all constrictive and expropriatory acts should be previously submitted to the universal court.
Upon analyzing the special appeal, Minister Raul Araújo highlighted that the jurisdiction of the judicial reorganization court to define the nature of the credit is only justified when there is controversy about its classification as concursal or extraconcursal. In the specific case, however, the extraconcursal nature was undisputed, even with a favorable manifestation from the judicial administrator, which is why suspending the execution would imply an improper application of the regime provided for in Article 6 of Law No. 11,101/2005 to a credit that the same legislation excludes from the effects of judicial reorganization. The Reporting Justice also emphasized that, after the changes promoted by Law No. 14,112/2020, the action of the reorganization court is limited to the analysis of constrictive acts that fall upon capital goods essential to the company, with no submission of other executive measures to the universal court.
Thus, the special appeal was granted to order the continuation of the execution against the company in judicial reorganization, reserving only the jurisdiction of the reorganization court to suspend, during the stay period, constrictions specifically levied on capital goods essential to the continuation of the business activity. The decision reaffirms the position that credits with fiduciary guarantees are not subject to the effects of judicial reorganization and that the intervention of the universal court must observe the limits expressly provided for in Law No. 11,101/2005.
REsp n° 2.261.458
Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJ/SP) authorizes attachment of property registered in the name of the debtor’s wife
The 14th Private Law Chamber of the Court of Justice of São Paulo (TJ/SP) authorized the attachment of the 25% ideal fraction of a property registered in the name of the wife of one of the executed parties, in a controversy that originated in the execution of an extrajudicial title filed by a financial institution. The trial court had denied the request, on the grounds that the asset was not part of the executed parties’ patrimony, but, on appeal, the bank emphasized that the marriage is under the regime of universal communion of property, a circumstance that makes the real estate part of the common patrimony, and, therefore, liable for the executed debt.
Upon analyzing the appeal, Appellate Judge Thiago de Siqueira highlighted that, under the universal communion regime, there is communication of both the assets and the debts of the spouses, pursuant to Article 1,667 of the Civil Code, save for legal exceptions. He also noted that a debt assumed by one of the spouses during the marriage is presumed to have been contracted for the benefit of the family, and it is up to the other spouse to demonstrate that the obligation did not revert to the benefit of the family nucleus to avoid patrimonial liability. In the specific case, the marriage certificate proved that the couple has been married under this regime since 1970, which is why the ideal fraction of the property, although registered only in the wife’s name, is part of the common patrimony.
Given this scenario, the panel granted the appeal to authorize the attachment of the 25% ideal fraction of the property, ordering the continuation of the constrictive acts. The decision emphasized that, since it is an indivisible asset, the protection granted by Article 843 of the Civil Procedure Code must be observed, ensuring the executed party’s wife the right to her half-share of the value obtained from the eventual judicial sale of the asset.
Case: 2098953-57.2026.8.26.0000
STJ recognizes collective damage for delay in demarcating quilombola land
The First Panel of the STJ recognized that the unjustified delay of the Public Power in concluding the titling process of the Catuabo Quilombola Community, in Sergipe, constituted collective moral damage. The Union and Incra were jointly and severally ordered to pay compensation to be quantified in the liquidation of the sentence.
The controversy originated in a public civil action filed by the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office, due to the delay in concluding the procedure for identification, recognition, delimitation, demarcation, and titling of the territory occupied by the quilombola community in question, formed by 142 families and recognized by the Palmares Cultural Foundation in 2006. Although the Technical Report for Identification and Delimitation was completed in 2017, with the delimitation of an area of 886.77 hectares, the procedure remained paralyzed, awaiting the issuance of a presidential expropriation decree. The trial court ordered the adoption of the necessary measures to conclude the titling, but rejected the request for compensation for collective moral damage, which was upheld by the TRF of the 5th Region.
According to the Reporting Justice, Minister Paulo Sérgio Domingues, the state’s delay was not a mere bureaucratic delay, but represented an obstacle to the realization of a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution. It was also highlighted that the right to the territory of quilombola communities has protection under Article 68 of the Transitional Constitutional Provisions Act and is part of the protection of Brazilian cultural heritage, since the land is an essential element for the preservation of the identity, culture, and historical continuity of these communities.
Therefore, it was understood that the paralysis of the procedure for almost two decades exceeded any reasonable parameter for the duration of the administrative process and characterized qualified state omission, and that the court of origin was mistaken in requiring proof of suffering or psychological distress, a requirement incompatible with the nature of collective moral damage.
The decision reinforces that collective moral damage is presumed when a serious violation of transindividual rights is configured, dismissing the need for proof of concrete harm. With this, the STJ recognizes that unjustified delay in the regularization of quilombola territory can result in State liability, especially when it compromises fundamental rights linked to collective property, ethnic-cultural identity, historical continuity, and the community’s legal certainty.
Link: REsp nº 2153688/SE