|
|
The 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice reformed the ruling to establish, as a method of quantifying a donation made to the heirs, the certain value corresponding to the sale of land by the deceased and his wife, the credit for which was donated to the children and subsequently paid off through the granting of some properties built on the land by a construction company.
The Court of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul had adopted the economic benefit relating to the granting of assets to the heirs as a calculation criterion. However, the STJ panel considered that article 1,792 of the Civil Code of 1916 provides, to define the value of donated goods, the objective criterion of the certain or estimated value of the good — in the present case, the credit for the sale of the land.
"This, therefore, is the value to be considered for the purpose of the collation and equalization of the legitimate assets, and the profit or economic benefit represented by the real estate (two apartments and three boxes) that were subsequently recorded in favor of the donees as a form of payment for the credit they received as a donation from the author of the inheritance", stated the rapporteur of the special resource, minister Nancy Andrighi.
According to the records, in 1995, the B2B Lead author of the inheritance and his wife sold land to a construction company for the value of R$100,000. In 1996, they gave credit for the sale to the only heirs born at the time of the deal. Later, in 2000, as a form of repayment of the credit, the construction company granted the heirs deeds for two apartments and three boxes built on the land subject to the sale. The heirs' father died in 2001.
In the inventory action, the judge determined, for sharing purposes, that the collection should be based on the value of the properties built on the land sold, and not by the value of the credit received by the deceased at the time of sale. The decision was upheld by the TJ-RS.
Safeguard
Nancy Andrighi said that the purpose of the collation is to equalize the legitimate parties, and it is mandatory for successive descendants to bring to the conference the property object of donation from the common ancestor, considering that, in these cases, there is a presumption of advance of the inheritance.
"It is concluded, therefore, that the reason for the existence of this institute is closely associated with the impossibility of placing one of the heirs in a disadvantageous position in relation to the others, safeguarding the right granted to all to share equal portions of the legitimate left by the author of inheritance," he said.
In this sense, the minister explained that article 1,792 of the 1976 Civil Code (which corresponds to article 2,004 of the 2002 code) establishes, as a criterion for equalizing the legitimate, the certain or estimated value of the asset, with no reference to the profit or benefit economic value that this good eventually brought to the donee.
Objective criterion
According to Nancy, the choice is justified by the need to establish an objective criterion that is not influenced by external elements of an economic, temporal or market nature, "which, if they exist, must be experienced exclusively by the donee, without impacting the equal agreement legitimate."
This is the reason why paragraph 2 of the provisions in the two codes "exclude from the collation added improvements, income, profits, damages and losses related to the donated good, applying the same reasoning to economic profits or benefits that may occur brought to the donee", he concluded when reversing the TJ-RS decision. With information from the STJ Press Office.
|
|
發表於 2024-3-14 13:11:19