The Protection of Family Property and Its Exceptions: Analysis of the STJ Decision on Renovation Debts
A Proteção do Bem de Família e suas Exceções
The concept of family property is fundamental in Brazilian law, offering special protection to residential property against seizure for debt payment. However, this protection is not absolute and is subject to legal exceptions. Recently, the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) expanded the understanding of one of these exceptions, allowing the seizure of family property to settle renovation debts. Let's explore this issue in detail.
Family Property and Its Protection
Law 8.009/1990 establishes that family property, defined as the residential property owned by the couple or family entity, is unseizable. This protection aims to guarantee the right to housing and human dignity, preventing families from becoming homeless due to debts.
Exceptions to Unseizability
Despite the protection, the law provides for some exceptions where the seizure of family property is allowed. The main exceptions include:
Property tax debts: Such as IPTU.
Condominium debts: That fall on the property itself.
Labor debts: For payment of domestic employees' salaries.
Financing for property acquisition or construction: According to Article 3, Item II, of Law 8.009/1990.
The STJ Decision on Renovation Debts
In a recent judgment, the STJ decided that the exception to unseizability also applies to debts incurred for property renovation. In Special Appeal 2082860, the 3rd Panel of the STJ, under the rapporteurship of Minister Nancy Andrighi, authorized the seizure of a property considered family property for payment of renovation services.
Case Details
The decision involved a property where the owner had resided for over 18 years. The debt was related to a service contract for property renovation. The owner argued that the property could not be seized because it was family property. However, the STJ understood that property renovation falls under the exceptions provided by law, allowing seizure.
Decision Rationale
The court argued that the purpose of the rule is to prevent debtors from using family property protection to avoid paying debts related to the property itself. Renovations, like construction, add value to the property, and it would be unfair to allow someone to benefit from improvements without paying for them.
Implications of the Decision
This decision sets an important precedent, expanding the situations in which family property can be seized. This brings more security to renovation service providers, ensuring they can receive payment for services rendered. On the other hand, it alerts property owners about the need for financial planning when undertaking renovations.
Conclusion
The protection of family property remains an essential guarantee in Brazilian law. However, the STJ decision shows that this protection must be balanced with other rights, such as those of renovation creditors. Property owners should be aware of the financial implications of renovations on their properties to avoid unpleasant surprises.
Comments