In a recent decision, the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) established that the failure of the plaintiff to pay additional costs cannot result in the case being dismissed. In addition, it ruled that, for the purposes of terminating the proceedings on this basis, it is essential for the party to be personally summoned, and it is not sufficient merely to summon their lawyer.
But what are additional costs?
Complementary costs (custos processuais) are fees paid by the parties in order for the judiciary to process a lawsuit. When there is a change in the value of the case or other factors that require a new calculation, it may be necessary to pay an additional fee, called supplementary costs.
But what happens if these costs are not paid? Can the case be dismissed? The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) analyzed this issue and made an important decision.
The case analyzed by the court
In the case under review, two plaintiffs filed a claim for maintenance of possession against a company.
After the litigation began, the defendant requested a change in the value of the case, which was granted. As a result, the plaintiffs were summoned by their lawyer to pay the costs.
However, due to the inertia and consequent default, the case was dismissed. The decision was upheld by the State Court, leading the Plaintiffs to file a Special Appeal with the STJ.
Why is personal summons necessary?
At the Supreme Court, Justice Ricardo Villas Bôas Cueva, the Rapporteur of the case, pointed out that, according to the case law of the STJ, it is not permissible to terminate proceedings for non-payment of costs.
He also pointed out that, in exceptional cases of termination of proceedings for abandonment of the cause, the party must be personally summoned due to the seriousness of the situation, as provided for in article 485, item III, §1, of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Continuing his reasoning, the justice stated that the difference in the type of summons “is justified by the more severe consequences imposed on the plaintiff after service“.
“Prior to service, summons in the person of a lawyer is more efficient and less costly for the court. In addition, with the cancellation of distribution, there is no possibility of registration as an active debt “.
He added:
“Therefore, in order to preserve a personal guarantee for the party, in the event of any negligence on the part of the lawyer, personal summons is required.”
The impact of the decision on future cases
In this way, the decision of the 3rd Panel of the STJ reaffirms the importance of due process of law and the guarantees of the parties, especially in situations that can culminate in the termination of the case without resolution of the merits.
The understanding reinforces that measures with a serious impact, such as dismissal for abandonment, cannot be raised for non-payment of additional costs and require the personal summons of the party, ensuring respect for the procedural rules in force.
Doubts and questions?
We are attentive to the latest case law and discussions in all areas of the Judiciary in order to provide adequate and effective advice to our clients.
