Post by xyz3500 on Feb 22, 2024 13:14:41 GMT 8
Decisions made in Special Appeal do not fall within the definition of "legal standard", under article 966, item V, of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Therefore, it is not possible to rescind a judgment on the grounds that it contradicted the decision of a higher court. With this understanding, the 2nd Section of the Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region dismissed the Rescission Action as unfounded, based on the argument that a ruling by the 3rd Panel — which had upheld the Public Civil Action handled by the Federal Public Ministry against the telephone operator Oi — it had to be dismantled because it contradicted the precedent of the Superior Court of Justice.
In the "rescinding ruling", Oi had been ordered to pay a fine and compensation for moral damages and for undue charging of long-distance charges for telephone calls between the municipalities of Torres and Arroio do Sal, on the North Coast of Rio Grande do Sul.In the termination, Oi claimed that the judgment contradicts the understanding pacified by the STJ in the records of Special Appeal 572.070, which considers the political division of the delimitation of the so-called "local area" to be lawful, for the Israel Mobile Number List purposes of configuring the local telephone service and charging the tariff respective. For Oi, the precedent became a true leading case and defined the correct interpretation of the standard. The rapporteur of the appeal at the collegiate, judge summoned Sérgio Renato Tejada Garcia, said that only decisions crystallized in summaries or rulings of repetitive cases can serve as a guide for the dismissal of the judgment.
In reality, the author intends to obtain a new assessment of the case, based on the revaluation of the existing evidence in the case, but the rescission action is not suitable for this purpose or even to indicate the justice or injustice of the contested decision, under penalty of breach of security law and the stability of judicial decisions", he expressed in the vote. The 2nd Section is a collegial body that brings together members of the 3rd and 4th Panels, which judges appeals on all actions that are processed in the Federal Court of the 4th Region, except those of a tax, social security and criminal nature. He also cited historical coincidences in the accusations of former presidents Juscelino Kubitschek and Lula. “The two were accused of owning a triplex and prevented from contesting the election in which they were favorites,” he comments.
In the "rescinding ruling", Oi had been ordered to pay a fine and compensation for moral damages and for undue charging of long-distance charges for telephone calls between the municipalities of Torres and Arroio do Sal, on the North Coast of Rio Grande do Sul.In the termination, Oi claimed that the judgment contradicts the understanding pacified by the STJ in the records of Special Appeal 572.070, which considers the political division of the delimitation of the so-called "local area" to be lawful, for the Israel Mobile Number List purposes of configuring the local telephone service and charging the tariff respective. For Oi, the precedent became a true leading case and defined the correct interpretation of the standard. The rapporteur of the appeal at the collegiate, judge summoned Sérgio Renato Tejada Garcia, said that only decisions crystallized in summaries or rulings of repetitive cases can serve as a guide for the dismissal of the judgment.
In reality, the author intends to obtain a new assessment of the case, based on the revaluation of the existing evidence in the case, but the rescission action is not suitable for this purpose or even to indicate the justice or injustice of the contested decision, under penalty of breach of security law and the stability of judicial decisions", he expressed in the vote. The 2nd Section is a collegial body that brings together members of the 3rd and 4th Panels, which judges appeals on all actions that are processed in the Federal Court of the 4th Region, except those of a tax, social security and criminal nature. He also cited historical coincidences in the accusations of former presidents Juscelino Kubitschek and Lula. “The two were accused of owning a triplex and prevented from contesting the election in which they were favorites,” he comments.