Marília Silva de Melo
Lawyer at Marcos Martins Advogados
The Superior Labor Court, by means of a decision handed down by Subsection II Specialized in Individual Disputes, SDI-II, exempted a company located in the city of Contagem/MG from having to pay a prior deposit in order to file a rescission action.
By filing the rescission action, the company intended to overturn a sentence that had condemned it, along with its partners, to pay a former employee several labor sums.
The Regional Labor Court of the 3rd Region dismissed the action for rescission on the grounds of the absence of essential documents and the prior deposit of 20%, as required by article 836 of the CLT.
The company filed an Ordinary Appeal against the decision and, for the rapporteur of the case, Justice Dezena da Silva, it was duly proven that the essential documents for the rescission were in the case file, as well as that, after the company was summoned to prove its legal miserability, for analysis of the request for free legal aid, it was shown “unequivocally” that the company had been inactive for more than two years when the rescission action was filed.
Thus, in the rapporteur’s opinion, the company’s hypo-sufficiency was proven, as it had not been active since 2012, and item II of Sumula 463 of the TST applied to the case, which states that for a legal entity, mere allegations are not enough to be granted free legal aid, there must be a full demonstration of the impossibility of bearing the costs and procedural expenses.
