The 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has ruled that actions for recognition of a stable union brought against the estate or heirs of a deceased partner, in the absence of incapacitated children, must be heard in the court corresponding to the couple’s last common domicile. This understanding follows the provisions of article 53, item I, paragraph “b”, of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
In other words, the STJ decided that such actions should be tried in the place where the couple last lived.
The position was consolidated in a case in which a woman sought recognition of her stable union and inheritance rights after the death of her partner.
The STJ’s decision highlighted the prevalence of the specific rule on jurisdiction in article 53 of the CPC over the general rule in article 46, which regulates jurisdiction in legal disputes between parties.
Changes to the CPC and advances in case law
According to the rapporteur, Justice Ricardo Villas Bôas Cueva, even if the action is directed at the estate or the successors, its legal nature does not change and the jurisdiction defined by article 53 of the CPC is maintained.
The STJ, since the CPC/1973, had already adopted the view that the court of the woman’s residence had jurisdiction in actions of this nature, including in cases involving the death of one of the partners.
With the 2015 CPC, a more specific rule was introduced, establishing that, in the absence of incapacitated children, jurisdiction lies with thecouple’s last place of cohabitation .
The minister pointed out that, generally, the most relevant evidence, such as real estate and witnesses, is found there, facilitating the trial.
What does this decision mean?
This decision reinforces the thesis that the court’s jurisdiction remains tied to the couple’s last domicile, even after the death of one of the partners, ensuring the application of the specific rule to the detriment of the general rule set out in article 46 of the Civil Code.
This interpretation reflects an evolution in the court’s jurisprudence and aims to provide greater proximity to evidence and witnesses, ensuring greater effectiveness in resolving disputes involving stable unions.
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.
