data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/18ebb/18ebb6453e3e4fbf6aae2def6cf035a43be7190d" alt="Teoria da actio nata"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7b990/7b99064287e8ac63562745ebea36c8c7654062da" alt="teoria da actio nata teoria da actio nata"
Notwithstanding the current jurisprudence panorama, where the Superior Court of Justice established the understanding of binding nature in the RESP 1,551,956/SP, which states that the three-year statute of limitations of the art. 206, § 3, IV, of the Civil Code concerning unjust enrichment would apply, it is intended to clarify the dispute that resulted in the edition of the precedent, and establish relevant distinction, which investigates the circumstances that resulted in the deduction of intention of reimbursement, and that could give rise to both the application of statute of limitations (the general decennial art. This article intends to analyze the statute of limitations that notifies the intention of reimbursement of the brokerage commission of real estate development contracts, with attention to the legal contours of the brokerage contract and of the limitations norms, and in the face of legitimate expectations and legal certainty of judicial consistency. Prescription deadlines raise various doctrinal and jurisprudential controversies, which have not been mitigated by the rules that propose to do so, such as the 2002 Civil Code, despite their clear intention of operability in relation to the effects of time in legal relations. ‘Neither the "dogmatic slumber" or the "ideological" sprees, the constitutional law expresses an “ethical positivism”, which, without renouncing the normative data, is founded on the priority of the values enshrined in the constitutional text.’ Anderson Schreiber KEYWORDS: Statute of Limitations Commission of brokerage Legal certainty Judicial consistency
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44638/44638f20cdb419e85e749a3f7e9ce51baae97958" alt="teoria da actio nata teoria da actio nata"
LIMITATIONS PERIOD AND INTENTION OF REIMBURSEMENT OF BROKERAGE COMMISSION IN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS: LEGAL CERTAINTY AND JUDICIAL CONSISTENCYĪBSTRACT: The goal of this article is to analyze the limitations for claim of reimbursement of the amount paid by the consumer as a brokerage commission in real estate development contracts. The issue is examined in the light of the requirements of legal certainty and judicial consistency. The intention is to describe the current panorama of jurisprudence, which results from the binding precedent edited by the Superior Court of Justice, and to make the pertinent distinctions.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/18ebb/18ebb6453e3e4fbf6aae2def6cf035a43be7190d" alt="Teoria da actio nata"