Sílvio de Souza Lôbo Júnior
Presentation
This work aims to explore the propter rem obligation, relating doctrine, especially Maria Helena Diniz, Sílvio Rodrigues, and Sílvio Venosa. Additionally, three legal precedents were chosen: two from the state of São Paulo, Court of Justice, 34th Chamber of Private Law, and one from the Court of Justice - Section of Private Law of the 26th Chamber of Santa Catarina, legal scholars, and current Brazilian legislation and jurisprudence.
The first intention is to cover definitions. Understanding the term and developing a concept that helps to find such an obligation in the Civil Code and its application in real cases, amidst daily life and conflict.
Secondly, to attribute this concept to real facts, its relationship with Real Rights, thus the propter rem obligation as an aspect of the real obligation, and its relation of the owner to the property, its real link to the thing.
Lastly, jurisprudence demonstrating the position of some courts with their decisions on this matter.
1. Doctrinal Definitions,
According to Orlando Gomes, propter rem obligations “arise from the debtor’s real right over a certain thing”[1]. Arnoldo Wald states that obligations “derive from someone’s linkage to certain assets, over which duties arise from the need to maintain the thing”[2]. Meanwhile, Maria Helena Diniz explains that it is the “linkage to a real right, that is, to a certain thing of which the debtor is the owner or possessor”[3].
Among other legal scholars in simple concepts, Sílvio Rodrigues describes propter rem by stating that, "it binds the holder of a real right, whoever it may be, by virtue of their condition as owner or possessor[4]". Sílvio Venosa explains it by affirming that "it is an obligatory relationship characterized by its linkage to the thing"[5].
Illuminated by these legal scholars, it is possible to conceptualize propter rem obligations as obligations that follow the real object (thing), such as condominium fees for a property or IPTU (Property Tax).
Another conceptualization is that an obligation "is a transitory pecuniary legal relationship, uniting two (or more) people, where one (the debtor) must perform a service to the other (the creditor)[6]." And to complete it, we resort to other concepts such as "an obligation is a transitory legal relationship, which compels us to give, do, or not do something, generally economically appreciable, for the benefit of someone who, by our act or the act of someone legally related to us, or by virtue of the law, has acquired the right to demand this action or omission from us (3)."; "an obligation is a legal relationship, of a transitory nature, established between debtor and creditor and whose object consists of an economic personal performance, positive or negative, owed by the former to the latter, guaranteeing its fulfillment through their assets (BARROS, 97)
[7]".
1.1. Termination of the Obligation
Maria Helena Diniz clarifies that the "possibility of the debtor being exonerated by abandoning the real right, renouncing the right to the thing[8]". Sílvio Rodrigues states that "the debtor is freed from the obligation by abandoning the real right"[9].
Sílvio Venosa relates the extinction of the obligation to its transfer, "the birth, transmission, and extinction of the propter rem obligation follow the real right, with a vinculation of accession"[10];
Based on these doctrinal positions, it is possible to affirm that the propter rem obligation, by accompanying the thing, only ceases for the obligated party in the same way that the transfer of the thing occurs, i.e., by its tradition or by the abandonment of the thing.
1.2 Transmission of the Obligation
Regarding transmission, Maria Helena Diniz states that the "transmissibility through legal transactions, in which case the obligation will fall on the acquirer"[11]. Sílvio Rodrigues explains that "the obligation is transmitted to the singular successors of the debtor".
Sílvio Venosa also states that "the so-called real obligation forms, in a way, part of the content of the real right, and its effectiveness towards the singular successors of the debtor provides stability to the content of the right[12]".
2. Legal Application
2.1. Cases of Application
The following are propter rem obligations:
- The obligation of a co-owner to contribute to the conservation or division of the common property; - The obligation of neighboring property owners to contribute to the expenses of building dividing fences; - The obligation of the acquirer of a mortgaged asset to settle the debt that burdens it if they wish to release it; - The obligation of the owner of assets incorporated into the national historical and artistic heritage to not destroy or carry out works that modify their appearance; - The obligation of owners of bordering properties to contribute to the expenses of marking and renewing destroyed dividing markers; - The negative obligation in the case of easements, where the owner of the servient tenement cannot hinder the legitimate use of the easement; - The obligation of the owner to provide surety regarding imminent damage to a neighboring property; - Obligations related to neighborliness rights;
3. Jurisprudence
3.1 First Jurisprudence
JUDICIAL POWER
SANTA CATARINA
TRIBUNAL OF JUSTICE - SECTION OF PRIVATE LAW
26th CHAMBER
AGRAVO DE INSTRUMENTO N° 1.221.335-0/5
"The propter rem obligation is one in which the debtor, by being the holder of a right over a thing, is subject to a certain performance that, consequently, did not arise from the express or tacit manifestation of their will.
What makes them a debtor is the circumstance of holding the real right, and it is so true that they are released from the obligation if they renounce that right.
Therefore, the condominium debt is linked to the unit that generated it. The property owner will be liable for the debt, even if there is a change in ownership and the debt predates it.
In this context, consider the jurisprudence of the E. Superior Court of Justice:
"Auction - Property - Condominium Fees - Liability - Acquirer. Procedural Civil and Civil - Condominium - Condominium Fees - Passive Legitimacy - Auction – Appeal not heard. 1 - Following the Court's established orientation, the acquirer in an auction is liable for condominium charges on the auctioned property, even if they predate the auction, given the propter rem nature of condominium quotas. 2 - Appeal not heard." (Resp. n° 572.767-0-SC, Rei. Min. Jorge Scartezzini, j. 04/19/2005, p. 05/16/2005)
3.1 Second Jurisprudence
JUDICIAL POWER
SÃO PAULO
TRIBUNAL OF JUSTICE
34th CHAMBER OF PRIVATE LAW
AGRAVO DE INSTRUMENTO N° 1.219.012.0072
SANTOS - 8th CIVIL COURT
APPELLANT: NICOLINO BOZZELLA
APPELLEE: CONDOMÍNIO EDIFÍCIO VAN GOGH
CONDOMINIUM EXPENSES - COLLECTION - EXECUTION
CONDOMINIUM EXPENSES - EXECUTION - PROPTER REM OBLIGATION - ATTACHMENT OF THE CONDOMINIUM UNIT - POSSIBILITY. Regarding a propter rem obligation, the attachment of the condominium unit that incurred the debt is possible, as it is covered by the exception established in art. 3, IV, of Law 8.009/90. APPEAL DENIED.
VOTE N° 6789
1. This is an interlocutory appeal filed by Nicolino Bozzella, seeking reform of the respectable decision, issued in a debt collection action for condominium expenses, in the execution phase, which denied the replacement of the seized debtor's property with a less burdensome one for the debtor.
Dissatisfied, the appellant argues for the necessity of replacing the seizure with a less burdensome property, as well as its inviolability, given that it is a family home.
The appeal was processed without a suspensive effect (p. 37). The appellee filed a response (pp. 40/93), requesting the condemnation of the appellant for bad faith litigation.
This is the essential summary.
2. This is a debt collection action for condominium expenses, filed by the condominium against the co-owner, arguing that the defendant failed to honor the payment of condominium expenses.
Responsibility for condominium debts is propter rem, as it is directly and fully guaranteed by the asset itself that generated them. [...]
3.3 Third Jurisprudence
Superior Court of Justice
AgRg no RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 657.386 - SP (2004/0061230-1)
RELATOR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO
APPELLANT: ALCIDES PANUCI
ATTORNEY: KAOR TIBA
APPELLEE: CONDOMÍNIO EDIFÍCIO MANSÃO DO BARÃO DE PORTO ALEGRE
ATTORNEY: CINTHYA MACEDO PIMENTEL AND OTHERS
SUMMARY
AGRAVO REGIMENTAL IN THE SPECIAL APPEAL. COLLECTION OF CONDOMINIUM QUOTAS. PROPTER REM OBLIGATION. AGRAVO REGIMENTAL DENIED.
The challenged decision correctly applied the jurisprudence of this Court, stating that the collection of condominium quotas, being a propter rem obligation, can be brought against both the seller and the prospective buyer.
Agravo regimental denied.
Final Considerations
After a humble, yet enriching research, it is possible to formulate in my own words some pertinent considerations on Propter Rem Obligations. Thus, I define it here as the obligation that follows the thing; the perpetual obligation that passes through the tradition from the former owner to the new one, obligating them to satisfy such obligation.
The Propter Rem Obligation can only be extinguished for a proprietor through the tradition of the thing to a new proprietor, at which point they assume the obligation. Or through abandonment, where the obligation is relinquished when the status of possession over the thing is also relinquished.
The abandonment that extinguishes the propter rem obligation is the same that extinguishes possession; therefore, there is no talk of suspension but of a definitive loss of the right to the thing.
It is not just taxes that are propter rem obligations; this is merely an example. Any obligation that follows the thing, such as the servitude of the land, or any other that follows the thing, thus giving rise to the rich doctrine on the subject.
In conclusion, the propter rem obligation is considered the natural responsibility for the collective, whether for the land burdened by the necessary servitude for passage, or for the condominium necessary for the maintenance and conservation of the thing. There can be no separation of this obligation from the thing, without considering deterioration or harm to the collective.
Bibliographical References
BARROS MONTEIRO, Washington de. Curso de Direito Civil. Vol.4.25th Ed. 1991 Editora Saraiva, São Paulo.
DINIZ, Maria Helena. Curso de Direito Civil Brasileiro. 2nd Volume. 10th Edition. Ed. Saraiva. P. 11. GOMES, Orlando. Obrigações. 11th Edition. Ed. Forense. p. 21.
LOPES, Lívia Cardoso; et al. Das obrigações "propter rem" em face do novo Código Civil brasileiro. UGC, 2003. Available at: <http://jus2.uol.com.br/doutrina/ texto.asp?id=4798>, Accessed on September 25, 2009.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Teoria Geral das Obrigações e Teoria Geral dos Contratos.3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
SUPERIOR TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA; AgRg no RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 657.386 - SP (2004/0061230-1); RELATOR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO. Available at http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-1000000190381-4-000-1-tjmg. Accessed on September 24, 2009.
TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA; SEÇÃO DE DIREITO PRIVADO; 26a CÂMARA - AGRAVO DE INSTRUMENTO N° 1.221.335-0/5. Available at http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-00000019 0381-4-df00-1-tjmg. Accessed on September 24, 2009.
TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA; JUDICIAL POWER - SÃO PAULO - 34th CHAMBER OF PRIVATE LAW; VOTE N° 6789; Available at http://ww w.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-00000019 038133-4-df00-1-tjmg. Accessed on September 25, 2009.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th ed. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. p. 60.
[1]
GOMES, Orlando. Obrigações. 11th Edition. Ed. Forense. p. 21.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th Edition. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. p. 60.
DINIZ, Maria Helena. Curso de Direito Civil Brasileiro. 2nd Volume. 10th Edition. Ed. Saraiva. p. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Teoria Geral das Obrigações e Teoria Geral dos Contratos.3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem
DE BARROS MONTEIRO, Washington (1997, v. 4:8).
DINIZ, Maria Helena Ibidem , p. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Ibidem , 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
DINIZ, Maria HelenaIbidem , p. 11.
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
Sílvio de Souza Lôbo Júnior
Presentation
This work aims to explore the propter rem obligation, relating doctrine, especially Maria Helena Diniz, Sílvio Rodrigues, and Sílvio Venosa. Additionally, three legal precedents were chosen: two from the state of São Paulo, Court of Justice, 34th Chamber of Private Law, and one from the Court of Justice - Section of Private Law of the 26th Chamber of Santa Catarina, legal scholars, and current Brazilian legislation and jurisprudence.
The first intention is to cover definitions. Understanding the term and developing a concept that helps to find such an obligation in the Civil Code and its application in real cases, amidst daily life and conflict.
Secondly, to attribute this concept to real facts, its relationship with Real Rights, thus the propter rem obligation as an aspect of the real obligation, and its relation of the owner to the property, its real link to the thing.
Lastly, jurisprudence demonstrating the position of some courts with their decisions on this matter.
1. Doctrinal Definitions,
According to Orlando Gomes, propter rem obligations “arise from the debtor’s real right over a certain thing”[1]. Arnoldo Wald states that obligations “derive from someone’s linkage to certain assets, over which duties arise from the need to maintain the thing”[2]. Meanwhile, Maria Helena Diniz explains that it is the “linkage to a real right, that is, to a certain thing of which the debtor is the owner or possessor”[3].
Among other legal scholars in simple concepts, Sílvio Rodrigues describes propter rem by stating that, "it binds the holder of a real right, whoever it may be, by virtue of their condition as owner or possessor[4]". Sílvio Venosa explains it by affirming that "it is an obligatory relationship characterized by its linkage to the thing"[5].
Illuminated by these legal scholars, it is possible to conceptualize propter rem obligations as obligations that follow the real object (thing), such as condominium fees for a property or IPTU (Property Tax).
Another conceptualization is that an obligation "is a transitory pecuniary legal relationship, uniting two (or more) people, where one (the debtor) must perform a service to the other (the creditor)[6]." And to complete it, we resort to other concepts such as "an obligation is a transitory legal relationship, which compels us to give, do, or not do something, generally economically appreciable, for the benefit of someone who, by our act or the act of someone legally related to us, or by virtue of the law, has acquired the right to demand this action or omission from us (3)."; "an obligation is a legal relationship, of a transitory nature, established between debtor and creditor and whose object consists of an economic personal performance, positive or negative, owed by the former to the latter, guaranteeing its fulfillment through their assets (BARROS, 97)
[7]".
1.1. Termination of the Obligation
Maria Helena Diniz clarifies that the "possibility of the debtor being exonerated by abandoning the real right, renouncing the right to the thing[8]". Sílvio Rodrigues states that "the debtor is freed from the obligation by abandoning the real right"[9].
Sílvio Venosa relates the extinction of the obligation to its transfer, "the birth, transmission, and extinction of the propter rem obligation follow the real right, with a vinculation of accession"[10];
Based on these doctrinal positions, it is possible to affirm that the propter rem obligation, by accompanying the thing, only ceases for the obligated party in the same way that the transfer of the thing occurs, i.e., by its tradition or by the abandonment of the thing.
1.2 Transmission of the Obligation
Regarding transmission, Maria Helena Diniz states that the "transmissibility through legal transactions, in which case the obligation will fall on the acquirer"[11]. Sílvio Rodrigues explains that "the obligation is transmitted to the singular successors of the debtor".
Sílvio Venosa also states that "the so-called real obligation forms, in a way, part of the content of the real right, and its effectiveness towards the singular successors of the debtor provides stability to the content of the right[12]".
2. Legal Application
2.1. Cases of Application
The following are propter rem obligations:
- The obligation of a co-owner to contribute to the conservation or division of the common property; - The obligation of neighboring property owners to contribute to the expenses of building dividing fences; - The obligation of the acquirer of a mortgaged asset to settle the debt that burdens it if they wish to release it; - The obligation of the owner of assets incorporated into the national historical and artistic heritage to not destroy or carry out works that modify their appearance; - The obligation of owners of bordering properties to contribute to the expenses of marking and renewing destroyed dividing markers; - The negative obligation in the case of easements, where the owner of the servient tenement cannot hinder the legitimate use of the easement; - The obligation of the owner to provide surety regarding imminent damage to a neighboring property; - Obligations related to neighborliness rights;
3. Jurisprudence
3.1 First Jurisprudence
JUDICIAL POWER
SANTA CATARINA
TRIBUNAL OF JUSTICE - SECTION OF PRIVATE LAW
26th CHAMBER
AGRAVO DE INSTRUMENTO N° 1.221.335-0/5
"The propter rem obligation is one in which the debtor, by being the holder of a right over a thing, is subject to a certain performance that, consequently, did not arise from the express or tacit manifestation of their will.
What makes them a debtor is the circumstance of holding the real right, and it is so true that they are released from the obligation if they renounce that right.
Therefore, the condominium debt is linked to the unit that generated it. The property owner will be liable for the debt, even if there is a change in ownership and the debt predates it.
In this context, consider the jurisprudence of the E. Superior Court of Justice:
"Auction - Property - Condominium Fees - Liability - Acquirer. Procedural Civil and Civil - Condominium - Condominium Fees - Passive Legitimacy - Auction – Appeal not heard. 1 - Following the Court's established orientation, the acquirer in an auction is liable for condominium charges on the auctioned property, even if they predate the auction, given the propter rem nature of condominium quotas. 2 - Appeal not heard." (Resp. n° 572.767-0-SC, Rei. Min. Jorge Scartezzini, j. 04/19/2005, p. 05/16/2005)
3.1 Second Jurisprudence
JUDICIAL POWER
SÃO PAULO
TRIBUNAL OF JUSTICE
34th CHAMBER OF PRIVATE LAW
AGRAVO DE INSTRUMENTO N° 1.219.012.0072
SANTOS - 8th CIVIL COURT
APPELLANT: NICOLINO BOZZELLA
APPELLEE: CONDOMÍNIO EDIFÍCIO VAN GOGH
CONDOMINIUM EXPENSES - COLLECTION - EXECUTION
CONDOMINIUM EXPENSES - EXECUTION - PROPTER REM OBLIGATION - ATTACHMENT OF THE CONDOMINIUM UNIT - POSSIBILITY. Regarding a propter rem obligation, the attachment of the condominium unit that incurred the debt is possible, as it is covered by the exception established in art. 3, IV, of Law 8.009/90. APPEAL DENIED.
VOTE N° 6789
1. This is an interlocutory appeal filed by Nicolino Bozzella, seeking reform of the respectable decision, issued in a debt collection action for condominium expenses, in the execution phase, which denied the replacement of the seized debtor's property with a less burdensome one for the debtor.
Dissatisfied, the appellant argues for the necessity of replacing the seizure with a less burdensome property, as well as its inviolability, given that it is a family home.
The appeal was processed without a suspensive effect (p. 37). The appellee filed a response (pp. 40/93), requesting the condemnation of the appellant for bad faith litigation.
This is the essential summary.
2. This is a debt collection action for condominium expenses, filed by the condominium against the co-owner, arguing that the defendant failed to honor the payment of condominium expenses.
Responsibility for condominium debts is propter rem, as it is directly and fully guaranteed by the asset itself that generated them. [...]
3.3 Third Jurisprudence
Superior Court of Justice
AgRg no RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 657.386 - SP (2004/0061230-1)
RELATOR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO
APPELLANT: ALCIDES PANUCI
ATTORNEY: KAOR TIBA
APPELLEE: CONDOMÍNIO EDIFÍCIO MANSÃO DO BARÃO DE PORTO ALEGRE
ATTORNEY: CINTHYA MACEDO PIMENTEL AND OTHERS
SUMMARY
AGRAVO REGIMENTAL NO RECURSO ESPECIAL. COBRANÇA DE COTAS CONDOMINIAIS. OBRIGAÇÃO PROPTER REM. AGRAVO REGIMENTAL IMPROVIDO.
The challenged decision correctly applied the jurisprudence of this Court, stating that the collection of condominium quotas, being a propter rem obligation, can be brought against both the seller and the prospective buyer.
Agravo regimental improvido.
Final Considerations
After a humble, yet enriching research, it is possible to formulate in my own words some pertinent considerations on Propter Rem Obligations. Thus, I define it here as the obligation that follows the thing; the perpetual obligation that passes through the tradition from the former owner to the new one, obligating them to satisfy such obligation.
The Propter Rem Obligation can only be extinguished for a proprietor through the tradition of the thing to a new proprietor, at which point they assume the obligation. Or through abandonment, where the obligation is relinquished when the status of possession over the thing is also relinquished.
The abandonment that extinguishes the propter rem obligation is the same that extinguishes possession; therefore, there is no talk of suspension but of a definitive loss of the right to the thing.
It is not just taxes that are propter rem obligations; this is merely an example. Any obligation that follows the thing, such as the servitude of the land, or any other that follows the thing, thus giving rise to the rich doctrine on the subject.
In conclusion, the propter rem obligation is considered the natural responsibility for the collective, whether for the land burdened by the necessary servitude for passage, or for the condominium necessary for the maintenance and conservation of the thing. There can be no separation of this obligation from the thing, without considering deterioration or harm to the collective.
Bibliographical References
BARROS MONTEIRO, Washington de. Curso de Direito Civil. Vol.4.25th Ed. 1991 Editora Saraiva, São Paulo.
DINIZ, Maria Helena. Curso de Direito Civil Brasileiro. 2nd Volume. 10th Edition. Ed. Saraiva. P. 11. GOMES, Orlando. Obrigações. 11th Edition. Ed. Forense. p. 21.
LOPES, Lívia Cardoso; et al. Das obrigações "propter rem" em face do novo Código Civil brasileiro. UGC, 2003. Available at: <http://jus2.uol.com.br/doutrina/ texto.asp?id=4798>, Accessed on September 25, 2009.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Teoria Geral das Obrigações e Teoria Geral dos Contratos.3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
SUPERIOR TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA; AgRg no RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 657.386 - SP (2004/0061230-1); RELATOR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO. Available at http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-1000000190381-4-000-1-tjmg. Accessed on September 24, 2009.
TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA; SEÇÃO DE DIREITO PRIVADO; 26a CÂMARA - AGRAVO DE INSTRUMENTO N° 1.221.335-0/5. Available at http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-00000019 0381-4-df00-1-tjmg. Accessed on September 24, 2009.
TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA; JUDICIAL POWER - SÃO PAULO - 34th CHAMBER OF PRIVATE LAW; VOTE N° 6789; Available at http://ww w.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-00000019 038133-4-df00-1-tjmg. Accessed on September 25, 2009.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th ed. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. p. 60.
[1]
GOMES, Orlando. Obrigações. 11th Edition. Ed. Forense. p. 21.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th Edition. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. p. 60.
DINIZ, Maria Helena. Curso de Direito Civil Brasileiro. 2nd Volume. 10th Edition. Ed. Saraiva. p. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Teoria Geral das Obrigações e Teoria Geral dos Contratos.3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem
DE BARROS MONTEIRO, Washington (1997, v. 4:8).
DINIZ, Maria HelenaIbidem , p. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Ibidem , 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
DINIZ, Maria HelenaIbidem , p. 11.
SALVO VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
