Christmas!

The House of the STF (Supreme Court) said on Wednesday (27 / 5) the constitutionality of provisions of the Judicial Recovery Act that exempt the companies purchasing the assets of a company under administration or bankruptcy of the responsibility for labor debts. With the decision, the ministers felt that there is no succession of debts.

In practice, by denying an Adin (direct action of unconstitutionality) authored by the PDT (Democratic Labor Party), the Supreme indicated that, for example, in the case of Varig, the first and best remembered for the recovery proceedings in the country-the Goal should not assume the debts of the labor organization.

The rapporteur of the action, Minister Ricardo Lewandowski said that Law 11,101 of 2005 was created the need to preserve the productive sector and resulted in a broad debate in society and the sectors involved. For him, the fact that the buyers did not assume the debts of the succession does not mean a loss for workers.

"The law has brought an increase of the workers. The values used to purchase shares of companies are available to the court for recovery and are used primarily to pay debts labor, "said the rapporteur, who was accompanied by all the ministers present at the session.

Lewandowski noted that labor credits do not "disappear" because there is no succession. "Who wins are the workers, the first in order of preference of payment," he said.

The rapporteur also considered the new bankruptcy law "historic" and said their task of ensuring the survival of businesses in difficulty. Minister Ellen Gracie said that the legislation aims to preserve the production and employment in the country.

For Cezar Peluso, who accompanied the full rapporteur, the law would be "absolutely useless" to determine the full sequence of the labor debts. He stressed that no one would buy a company with debts impossible to pay.

Law 11.101/05 establishes that bankruptcy is no succession in the purchaser's labor obligations arising from accidents at work, or tax of any kind when he gets a production unit of the bankrupt business.

Article 60 says that the company acquires a manufacturing facility in receivership is not the case any obligation of the purchaser, including tax.

Subsection II of Article 141 states that "the object of the sale will be free from any encumbrances and shall not succeed the winning bidder in the debtor's obligations, including those of taxation, derived from the labor laws and those resulting from accidents at work."

The plenum of the Supreme also saw unconstitutionality of Article 83 of the Recovery Act, which limits to 150 minimum wages payment choice for the entitlements. According to minister Ellen Gracie, the device enables you to meet the vast majority of claims, since the average of these values, informed by the Labor Court, does not exceed 10 minimum wages.

SOURCE: Final Appeal