Sílvio de Souza Lôbo Júnior
Presentation
This work seeks to illuminate the propter rem obligation, relating doctrine, especially Maria Helena Diniz, Sílvio Rodrigues, and Sílvio Venosa, in addition to selecting three cases of jurisprudence, 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, doctrinal, current Brazilian legislation, and jurisprudence.
The first objective of this is the definitions. To understand the term, and to elaborate a concept that helps to find such an obligation in the Civil Code and its application in reality, in real cases, amidst daily life and conflicts.
Secondly, to attribute such a concept to the real fact, its relationship with Real Law, thus the propter rem obligation as an aspect of the real obligation, and its relationship between the owner and the property, its real link to the thing.
Finally, the jurisprudence demonstrating the position of some courts with their decisions on this topic.
1. Doctrinal Definitions,
The propter rem obligations, according to Orlando Gomes, "arise from a debtor's real right over a certain thing"[1]. Arnoldo Wald states that obligations "derive from someone's connection to certain assets, over which duties arise from the need to maintain the thing"[2]. Meanwhile, Maria Helena Diniz states that it is the "connection to a real right, that is, to a certain thing of which the debtor is the owner or possessor"[3].
Among other doctrinal scholars, in simple terms, Sílvio Rodrigues describes propter rem by saying that, "it binds the holder of a real right, whoever they may be, by virtue of their condition as owner or possessor[4]". Sílvio Venosa explains it by stating that "it is an obligatory relationship characterized by its connection to the thing"[5].
Illuminated by these doctrinal scholars, it is possible to define propter rem obligations as those that follow the real object (thing), such as condominium fees for real estate or IPTU (Property Tax).
Another definition is that an obligation "is a transitory pecuniary legal relationship, uniting two (or more) persons, with one (the debtor) having to perform a prestation 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 obliges us to give, do, or not do something, generally economically appreciable, for the benefit of someone who, by our act or by someone legally related to us, or by 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 prestation, 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 explains that the "possibility of exoneration of the debtor 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 link of accession"[10];
Based on these doctrinal statements, 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, that is, by tradition or by abandonment of the thing.
1.2 Transmission of the Obligation
Regarding transmission, Maria Helena Diniz states that "transmissibility through legal transactions, in which case the obligation will fall upon 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, to a certain extent, part of the content of the real right, and its effectiveness towards the singular successors of the debtor gives 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 condominium 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 pay the debt that encumbers it if they wish to release it; - The obligation of the owner of assets incorporated into the national historical and artistic heritage not to destroy or carry out works that modify their appearance; - The obligation of neighboring property owners to contribute to the expenses of demarcating and renewing destroyed dividing markers; - The negative obligation in the case of easements, where the owner of the servient estate cannot impede the legitimate use of the easement; - The obligation of the owner to provide a guarantee regarding imminent damage to a neighboring property; - Obligations related to the right of neighborhood;
3. Jurisprudence
3.1 First Jurisprudence
JUDICIAL POWER
SANTA CATARINA
COURT 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, becomes subject to a certain prestation that, consequently, did not arise from the express or tacit manifestation of their will.
What makes them a debtor is the circumstance of being the holder of the real right, and this is so true that they are released from the obligation if they renounce this right.
Therefore, the condominium debt is linked to the unit that generated it. The owner of the property will be liable for the debt, even if there is a change in ownership and the debt predates it.
In this context, see the jurisprudence of the E. Superior Court of Justice:
"Auction - Property - Condominium Fees - Responsibility - Acquirer. Procedural Civil and Civil - Condominium - Condominium Fees - Passive Legitimacy - Auction – Appeal not heard. 1 - In line with the orientation adopted by this Court, the acquirer, in an auction, is responsible for the condominium charges incident on the auctioned property, even if they predate the auction, given the 'propter rem' nature of condominium installments. 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
SAO PAULO
COURT 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. As it is a propter rem obligation, the attachment of the condominium unit that caused 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 instrument appeal filed by Nicolino Bozzella, seeking review of the respected decision, issued in a debt collection action for condominium expenses, in the execution phase, which denied the substitution of the attachment of the debtor unit, for a less burdensome asset for the debtor.
Dissatisfied, the appellant argues for the need to substitute the attachment for a less burdensome asset, as well as its non-attachability, as it is a family home.
The appeal was processed without 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.
The responsibility for condominium debts is propter rem, as it is directly and fully guaranteed by the asset itself that originated them. [...]
3.3 Third Jurisprudence
Superior Court of Justice
AGRAVO REGIMENTAL NO RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 657.386 - SP (2004/0061230-1)
RAPPORTEUR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO
APPELLANT: ALCIDES PANUCI
ATTORNEY: KAOR TIBA
APPELLEE: CONDOMINIO EDIFICIO MANSÃO DO BARÃO DE PORTO ALEGRE
ATTORNEY: CINTHYA MACEDO PIMENTEL AND ANOTHER(S)
SUMMARY
REGIMENTAL APPEAL IN SPECIAL APPEAL. COLLECTION OF CONDOMINIUM INSTALLMENTS. PROPTER REM OBLIGATION. REGIMENTAL APPEAL DENIED.
The challenged decision regularly applied the jurisprudence of this Court, to the effect that the collection of condominium installments, being a propter rem obligation, can be filed against both the promise-seller and the promise-buyer.
Regimental appeal denied.
Final Considerations
After a humble but enriching research, it is possible to create in my own words some considerations pertinent to Propter Rem Obligations. Therefore, 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, obliging them to satisfy such an obligation.
The Propter Rem Obligation can only be extinguished for a proprietor by the tradition of the thing to a new proprietor, when the latter assumes the obligation. Or by abandonment, in which the obligation is relinquished when the status of possession of the thing is simultaneously relinquished.
The abandonment that extinguishes the propter rem obligation is the same that extinguishes possession, therefore, there is nothing to say about suspension but a definitive loss of the right to the thing.
It is not only taxes that are a propter rem obligation; this is just one example. Any obligation that follows the thing, such as the easement of land, or any other that follows the thing, thus originating the rich doctrine on the subject.
In conclusion, the propter rem obligation is considered natural to collective responsibility, whether for land granted by necessary easement for passage, or for the condominium necessary for the maintenance and conservation of the asset. There is nothing to be said about separating this obligation from the thing, without mentioning 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. Pág. 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 Sep 25, 09.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
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); RAPPORTEUR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO. Available at http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-1000000190381-4-000-1-tjmg. Accessed on Sep 24, 09.
COURT OF JUSTICE; SECTION OF PRIVATE LAW; 26TH CHAMBER - 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 Sep 24, 09.
COURT OF JUSTICE; JUDICIAL POWER - SAO 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 Sep 25, 09.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th ed. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. p. 60.
[1]
GOMES, Orlando. Obrigações. 11th Edition. Ed. Forense. Pág. 21.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th Edition. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. Pág. 60.
DINIZ, Maria Helena. Curso de Direito Civil Brasileiro. 2nd Volume. 10th Edition. Ed. Saraiva. Pág. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
VENOSA, Sílvio. Teoria Geral das Obrigações e Teoria Geral dos Contratos.3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem
DE BARROS MONTEIRO, Washington (1997, v. 4:8).
DINIZ, Maria Helena Ibidem , Pág. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Ibidem , 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
DINIZ, Maria HelenaIbidem , Pág. 11.
VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
Sílvio de Souza Lôbo Júnior
Presentation
This work seeks to illuminate the propter rem obligation, relating doctrine, especially Maria Helena Diniz, Sílvio Rodrigues, and Sílvio Venosa, in addition to selecting three cases of jurisprudence, 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, doctrinal, current Brazilian legislation, and jurisprudence.
The first objective of this is the definitions. To understand the term, and to elaborate a concept that helps to find such an obligation in the Civil Code and its application in reality, in real cases, amidst daily life and conflicts.
Secondly, to attribute such a concept to the real fact, its relationship with Real Law, thus the propter rem obligation as an aspect of the real obligation, and its relationship between the owner and the property, its real link to the thing.
Finally, the jurisprudence demonstrating the position of some courts with their decisions on this topic.
1. Doctrinal Definitions,
The propter rem obligations, according to Orlando Gomes, "arise from a debtor's real right over a certain thing"[1]. Arnoldo Wald states that obligations "derive from someone's connection to certain assets, over which duties arise from the need to maintain the thing"[2]. Meanwhile, Maria Helena Diniz states that it is the "connection to a real right, that is, to a certain thing of which the debtor is the owner or possessor"[3].
Among other doctrinal scholars, in simple terms, Sílvio Rodrigues describes propter rem by saying that, "it binds the holder of a real right, whoever they may be, by virtue of their condition as owner or possessor[4]". Sílvio Venosa explains it by stating that "it is an obligatory relationship characterized by its connection to the thing"[5].
Illuminated by these doctrinal scholars, it is possible to define propter rem obligations as those that follow the real object (thing), such as condominium fees for real estate or IPTU (Property Tax).
Another definition is that an obligation "is a transitory pecuniary legal relationship, uniting two (or more) persons, with one (the debtor) having to perform a prestation 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 obliges us to give, do, or not do something, generally economically appreciable, for the benefit of someone who, by our act or by someone legally related to us, or by 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 prestation, 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 explains that the "possibility of exoneration of the debtor 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 link of accession"[10];
Based on these doctrinal statements, 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, that is, by tradition or by abandonment of the thing.
1.2 Transmission of the Obligation
Regarding transmission, Maria Helena Diniz states that "transmissibility through legal transactions, in which case the obligation will fall upon 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, to a certain extent, part of the content of the real right, and its effectiveness towards the singular successors of the debtor gives 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 condominium 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 pay the debt that encumbers it if they wish to release it; - The obligation of the owner of assets incorporated into the national historical and artistic heritage not to destroy or carry out works that modify their appearance; - The obligation of neighboring property owners to contribute to the expenses of demarcating and renewing dividing markers; - The negative obligation in the case of easements, where the owner of the servient estate cannot impede the legitimate use of the easement; - The obligation of the owner to provide a guarantee regarding imminent damage to a neighboring property; - Obligations related to the right of neighborhood;
3. Jurisprudence
3.1 First Jurisprudence
JUDICIAL POWER
SANTA CATARINA
COURT 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, becomes subject to a certain prestation that, consequently, did not arise from the express or tacit manifestation of their will.
What makes them a debtor is the circumstance of being the holder of the real right, and this is so true that they are released from the obligation if they renounce this right.
Therefore, the condominium debt is linked to the unit that generated it. The owner of the property will be liable for the debt, even if there is a change in ownership and the debt predates it.
In this context, see the jurisprudence of the E. Superior Court of Justice:
"Auction - Property - Condominium Fees - Responsibility - Acquirer. Procedural Civil and Civil - Condominium - Condominium Fees - Passive Legitimacy - Auction – Appeal not heard. 1 - In line with the orientation adopted by this Court, the acquirer, in an auction, is responsible for the condominium charges incident on the auctioned property, even if they predate the auction, given the 'propter rem' nature of condominium installments. 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
SAO PAULO
COURT 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. As it is a propter rem obligation, the attachment of the condominium unit that caused 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 instrument appeal filed by Nicolino Bozzella, seeking review of the respected decision, issued in a debt collection action for condominium expenses, in the execution phase, which denied the substitution of the attachment of the debtor unit, for a less burdensome asset for the debtor.
Dissatisfied, the appellant argues for the need to substitute the attachment for a less burdensome asset, as well as its non-attachability, as it is a family home.
The appeal was processed without 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.
The responsibility for condominium debts is propter rem, as it is directly and fully guaranteed by the asset itself that originated them. [...]
3.3 Third Jurisprudence
Superior Court of Justice
AGRAVO REGIMENTAL NO RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 657.386 - SP (2004/0061230-1)
RAPPORTEUR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO
APPELLANT: ALCIDES PANUCI
ATTORNEY: KAOR TIBA
APPELLEE: CONDOMINIO EDIFICIO MANSÃO DO BARÃO DE PORTO ALEGRE
ATTORNEY: CINTHYA MACEDO PIMENTEL AND ANOTHER(S)
SUMMARY
REGIMENTAL APPEAL IN SPECIAL APPEAL. COLLECTION OF CONDOMINIUM INSTALLMENTS. PROPTER REM OBLIGATION. REGIMENTAL APPEAL DENIED.
The challenged decision regularly applied the jurisprudence of this Court, to the effect that the collection of condominium installments, being a propter rem obligation, can be filed against both the promise-seller and the promise-buyer.
Regimental appeal denied.
Final Considerations
After a humble but enriching research, it is possible to create in my own words some considerations pertinent to Propter Rem Obligations. Therefore, 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, obliging them to satisfy such an obligation.
The Propter Rem Obligation can only be extinguished for a proprietor by the tradition of the thing to a new proprietor, when the latter assumes the obligation. Or by abandonment, in which the obligation is relinquished when the status of possession of the thing is simultaneously relinquished.
The abandonment that extinguishes the propter rem obligation is the same that extinguishes possession, therefore, there is nothing to say about suspension but a definitive loss of the right to the thing.
It is not only taxes that are a propter rem obligation; this is just one example. Any obligation that follows the thing, such as the easement of land, or any other that follows the thing, thus originating the rich doctrine on the subject.
In conclusion, the propter rem obligation is considered natural to collective responsibility, whether for land granted by necessary easement for passage, or for the condominium necessary for the maintenance and conservation of the asset. There is nothing to be said about separating this obligation from the thing, without mentioning 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. Pág. 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 Sep 25, 09.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
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); RAPPORTEUR: MINISTER LUIS FELIPE SALOMÃO. Available at http://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/4448035/1903814-mg-1000000190381-4-000-1-tjmg. Accessed on Sep 24, 09.
COURT OF JUSTICE; SECTION OF PRIVATE LAW; 26TH CHAMBER - 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 Sep 24, 09.
COURT OF JUSTICE; JUDICIAL POWER - SAO 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 Sep 25, 09.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th ed. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. p. 60.
[1]
GOMES, Orlando. Obrigações. 11th Edition. Ed. Forense. Pág. 21.
WALD, Arnoldo. Obrigações e Contratos. 12th Edition. Ed. Revista dos Tribunais. Pág. 60.
DINIZ, Maria Helena. Curso de Direito Civil Brasileiro. 2nd Volume. 10th Edition. Ed. Saraiva. Pág. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Direito Civil – Vol. 2 – Parte Geral das Obrigações. 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
VENOSA, Sílvio. Teoria Geral das Obrigações e Teoria Geral dos Contratos.3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem
DE BARROS MONTEIRO, Washington (1997, v. 4:8).
DINIZ, Maria HelenaIbidem , Pág. 11.
RODRIGUES, Sílvio. Ibidem , 30th ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002
VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
DINIZ, Maria HelenaIbidem , Pág. 11.
VENOSA, Sílvio. Ibidem , 3rd ed. São Paulo: Atlas. 2003.
