During Trial of Repetitive Special Appeal No. 1,345,021/CE, the First Panel of Superior Court of Justice ruled that even considering only strictly legal discussions concerning the regularity of a Certificate of Judicially Enforceable Debt (CDA), it is impossible to provide for a concrete thesis on the matter, which may be solved in several different ways, depending on the peculiarities of each case. Thus, the matter cannot be ruled under the regime provided by Section 543-C of the Civil Litigation Code (repetitive appeals).
Concerning the acceptance of the appeal, it ruled that the analysis of a nullity fault in the CDA can only be performed within a Special Appeal when it concerns the interpretation of federal law regarding the indication of certain information (way to calculate late-payment interest, legal basis, nature of debt etc.). On the other hand, the Court cannot analyze whether the document in the records effectively indicated such data.
In the actual case, Reporting Justice Herman Benjamin based his conclusions on the verification performed by Federal Appellate Court of the 5th Region, which stated that the CDA had all legal requirements. For this reason, the taxpayer’s claim to annul the executive title was denied.
(REsp 1345021/CE, Official Gazette of 08.02.2013).