STJ consolidates its understanding that a claim is subject to judicial reorganization even if it has not been formally filed in the proceeding.

Pessoas

relacionadas

Paola Juarez Macedo Sócio

The Second Section of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) has consolidated an important understanding with direct implications for corporate creditors: claims of a concursal nature are fully subject to the effects of judicial reorganization, even if the creditor chooses not to file a proof of claim in the proceeding.

The unanimous decision was rendered in the Embargos de Divergência in EREsp No. 2,091,587/RS, reported by Justice Nancy Andrighi, and aimed to harmonize the Court’s case law.

The STJ made it clear that submission to judicial reorganization derives from the nature of the claim itself (that is, from the fact that the triggering event occurred prior to the filing of the reorganization request) and not from the creditor’s procedural conduct. In other words, such submission arises by operation of law.

The ruling eliminates the possibility that a creditor who remains outside the reorganization proceedings may later seek to collect the claim under conditions different from those established in the reorganization plan. As emphasized by the reporting justice, the filing of a proof of claim is not mandatory, but the creditor’s absence from the proceedings does not prevent the full application of the plan’s provisions.

In practical terms, the precedent confirms that judicial reorganization produces effects over all concursal claims, regardless of the creditor’s active participation, which may significantly affect risk management strategies and asset recovery in situations of corporate insolvency.

We will continue to monitor the implications of this precedent and its developments in practice.