‎Brazil News

 

Judge denies request for withdrawal filed 28 minutes before the ruling

The judge also ordered the party, who received free legal aid, to pay the costs, noting that it inhibits legal adventure.

From the Newsroom

 

Thursday, December 12, 2024

 

Updated at 11:56

 

Share

 

Judge Jorge Di Ciero Miranda, of the 34th Civil Court of Fortaleza/CE, rejected a request for withdrawal of the lawsuit filed 28 minutes before the ruling was published. The decision considered that the case was already in the final analysis phase and that the request could not interrupt the course of the trial.

 

The judge also ordered the party to pay the costs, even though it was a beneficiary of free legal aid. Charging fees inhibits legal adventure and signals the possibility of losing the case as a risk to be considered.

 

The case involved a lawsuit for compensation for moral damages filed by a passenger against an airline related to the loss of baggage. The plaintiff filed a request to withdraw the case after the hearing and shortly before the ruling was published, but the judge denied the request.

 

In the ruling, the judge dismissed the claim for compensation, concluding that the inconvenience reported by the plaintiff did not constitute compensable moral damages.

 

The plaintiff subsequently appealed by means of a statement of clarification, alleging failure to analyze the request to withdraw the case and aspects related to the free legal aid granted in the case.

 

Adventurous litigation: Judge denies request to withdraw the appeal.

 

The judge justified that the request to withdraw the case was filed when the judgment was already in the final stages of drafting and that the procedural analysis had been exhausted.

 

It is reasonable to assume that, during the process of drafting and publishing the judgment, the plaintiff withdraws the action after resisting throughout the hearing when he was warned of the lack of cause of action, omission regarding the sanctions provided for in the regulatory standards, measures that should have been adopted at the time of the reply, but which were neglected until said phase.

 

Regarding the allegation of error regarding free legal aid, the judge emphasized that the judgment handed down correctly imposed the burden on the party that decides to venture into claims without preparatory analysis that justifies the mobilization of the judicial apparatus.

 

Charging fees inhibits legal adventure and signals the possibility of losing the case as a risk to be considered. They are relevant in covering the costs of the process and should be analyzed not only from the plaintiff's perspective, but also considering the legal system as a system and judicial organization as a state policy, in order to indicate to the first instance and those under jurisdiction an understanding of fundamental concepts involving the subject.

 

Therefore, the lawsuit was dismissed and the request for withdrawal was denied. In addition, the plaintiff was ordered to pay the legal costs, with a 15-day deadline to pay them, under penalty of being included in the State's active debt.

 

link: https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes/421500/juiz-nega-pedido-de-desistencia-feito-28-minutos-antes-da-sentenca