‎Brazil News

 

The decision aims to prevent the misuse of public resources in municipal contracts with success fees for international litigation.

 

The case, analyzed in a virtual plenary session, began on October 25 and ended this Tuesday, the 5th.

 

 

 

STF restricts fees in environmental disaster lawsuits abroad. 

The case

 

 filed an ADPF alleging that several municipalities affected by socio-environmental disasters had hired law firms abroad, including the British firm , to file lawsuits seeking compensation for the damages suffered.

 

The firm is acting internationally in a class action lawsuit against Anglo-Australian BHP and Brazilian Vale, the controlling companies. The lawsuit seeks compensation for damages resulting from the Mariana disaster.

 

The entity argued that these contracts, based on success clauses, could expose public coffers and disaster victims to excessive financial risks, as a large part of the compensation eventually obtained would remain in the hands of the offices, to the detriment of those actually harmed.

 

Furthermore,  mentioned the imminent trial of one of the lawsuits filed abroad, related to the disaster, which is scheduled for October in the United Kingdom, with compensation requests that could reach R$260 billion.

 

Rapporteurs vote

 

The rapporteur of the case, Minister  Dino, agreed with part of arguments, mainly with regard to the irregularity of risk contracts  into by the Public Administration, as already decided in precedents of the TCU and other state audit courts.

 

For Dino, it is pertinent to assess the conditions under which Brazilian municipalities litigate before foreign courts, since this aspect has consequences for part of the national public assets and for the effective and full reparation of damages perpetrated on Brazilian soil.

 

In view of this, the decision determines that the municipalities mentioned in the action must:

 

Submit copies of contracts signed with foreign law firms.

Refrain from making any payment of legal fees related to legal actions abroad, until there is express authorization from the STF or other sovereign bodies.

The minister clarified that there is no examination of the relevance and validity of ongoing legal actions before foreign courts, which will be carried out after due procedural instruction and manifestation of all competent bodies, in strict observance of the primacy of the adversarial system and full defense.

 

Dissenting vote

 

Minister Edson presented a dissenting position, arguing that  do not find in the records any evidence of urgency or danger of harm, that is, the concrete danger that such payments will occur or have occurred recently.

 

For him, there was no imminent risk that would justify an immediate decision, highlighting that the analysis of merits must occur in an appropriate time, respecting the adversarial system and procedural guarantees.

 

Ministers Nunes Marques and André  agreed with  understanding.

 

Read the dissenting vote .

 

Proceedings :  ADPF 1.178

 

 link: https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes/419452/caso-mariana-stf-proibe-municipios-de-pagar-advogados-no-exterior