Author: Ana Lúcia Teche, lawyer

Source: The Movement - SP - ARTICLES - 09/11/2009

The Federal Supreme Court has already approved twenty-one binding precedents since 2007, which put an end to numerous controversies about the issues discussed repeatedly in the lower courts and in the higher courts.

Last week, five new binding overviews were approved, edited with the purpose of pacifying decisions across the country and reflecting legal certainty for those in the same situation.

 
But what would be a binding summary?
In Brazilian law, the entry that records the peaceful or majority interpretation adopted by a Court regarding a specific theme is used in summary, with the dual purpose of making the jurisprudence for society public, as well as promoting uniformity between the decisions.

The binding precedent, on the other hand, is the jurisprudence which, when voted by the Federal Supreme Court, becomes a mandatory understanding to which all other courts and judges will have to follow. It acquires the force of law, creating a legal bond and having an erga omnes effect. Created on December 30, 2004, with Constitutional Amendment No. 45, which added article 103-A to the Brazilian Constitution, an article composed of the following text:

“The Supreme Federal Court may, ex officio or by provocation, by decision of two thirds of its members, after repeated decisions on constitutional matters, approve a summary that, from its publication in the official press, will have a binding effect in relation to the other organs of the Judiciary and to the direct and indirect public administration, at the federal, state and municipal levels, as well as to revise or cancel them, as established by law ”.
The last five binding overviews are decisions on various topics, but they are of interest to the whole of society:

The first concerns the non-payment of interest on arrears on precatories (payments owed by the Federal, State and Municipal Treasury due to a judicial sentence), in the period between their dispatch - inclusion in the budget of public law entities - and its payment, when made by the end of the following year, that is, within the constitutional term of 18 months.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court approved an entry that prevents ex-spouses from running for elective office if the judicial separation occurs during the term of one of them.

The Supreme Court unanimously approved an entry that confirms the constitutionality of the collection of garbage collection, removal and destination fees based on the calculation of the property's footage.
The STF approved a binding summary to recognize the right of inactive employees to receive the Technical-Administrative Activity Performance Bonus (GDATA).

Finally, the binding summary was published, which prevents the requirement of prior deposit or listing of assets as a condition for appealing to the Public Administration, and such requirement is unconstitutional.
The judgments under analysis and the edition of the binding summaries result in the standardization of decisions in similar concrete cases, avoiding lengthy proceedings and legal certainty for the courts.