TJ from Rio Grande do Sul considers basic telephone
Feb 12, 2024 9:46:58 GMT
Post by xyz3000 on Feb 12, 2024 9:46:58 GMT
A basic landline subscription is legal, as the service is available to the customer even if they don't use it. The decision is from the 16th Civil Chamber of the Grande do Sul Court of Justice, in a lawsuit filed by a consumer from Passo Fundo (RS) against Brasil Telecom. For the rapporteur, judge Helena Ruppenthal Cunha, the charging of the monthly fee is authorized by Anatel's regulatory standards. The subscription fee would be justified by the availability of the infrastructure, which includes maintenance, conservation and user service. Furthermore, for Helena, before purchasing the telephone line, the user knows the conditions for obtaining the service and can also suspend it at any time. Overview The monthly fee controversy is discussed nationally.
There has even been an injunction prohibiting charging throughout the country, which was revoked before it even came into force. Recently, the Superior Court of Justice decided to decentralize all actions that discuss signature. For the ministers of the 1st Section of the STJ, the possibility of divergent sentences Estonia Email List on the same legal issue does not, in itself, constitute a Conflict of Jurisdiction. The president of the STJ, minister Edson Vidigal, had concentrated all the processes in the 2nd Federal Court of Brasília. The recurring understanding is that the competence for actions on the basic subscription lies with the Federal Court, as they involve the regulatory agency, Anatel — Agência Nacional de Telecommunications.
Paragraph 2 of article 1,084 of the CC provides that this capital reduction only becomes effective if it is not challenged by the company's unsecured creditors within 90 days from the publication of the minutes of the meeting that approves the reduction, or if payment of the debt or the judicial deposit of the respective amount. In a different way, by regulating the company's resolution possibilities in relation to a partner due to death, withdrawal or exclusion, the new Civil Code, in articles 1,028 to 1,032, did not condition the effectiveness of the respective act of capital reduction to approval of creditors. bankruptcy or unilateral will of a partner, whether due to serious misconduct or a judicially declared interdiction of a partner on the initiative of the majority of the other partners.
There has even been an injunction prohibiting charging throughout the country, which was revoked before it even came into force. Recently, the Superior Court of Justice decided to decentralize all actions that discuss signature. For the ministers of the 1st Section of the STJ, the possibility of divergent sentences Estonia Email List on the same legal issue does not, in itself, constitute a Conflict of Jurisdiction. The president of the STJ, minister Edson Vidigal, had concentrated all the processes in the 2nd Federal Court of Brasília. The recurring understanding is that the competence for actions on the basic subscription lies with the Federal Court, as they involve the regulatory agency, Anatel — Agência Nacional de Telecommunications.
Paragraph 2 of article 1,084 of the CC provides that this capital reduction only becomes effective if it is not challenged by the company's unsecured creditors within 90 days from the publication of the minutes of the meeting that approves the reduction, or if payment of the debt or the judicial deposit of the respective amount. In a different way, by regulating the company's resolution possibilities in relation to a partner due to death, withdrawal or exclusion, the new Civil Code, in articles 1,028 to 1,032, did not condition the effectiveness of the respective act of capital reduction to approval of creditors. bankruptcy or unilateral will of a partner, whether due to serious misconduct or a judicially declared interdiction of a partner on the initiative of the majority of the other partners.