Até
onde se sabe não há entendimento sumulado quanto a este tema, o que
lamentavelmente nos leva a insegurança jurídica.
Em
recente pesquisa jurisprudencial, pode ser constado uma indesejável oscilação no
entendimento jurisprudencial do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo quanto a
matéria. Observou-se que há câmaras que têm determinado a restituição da
comissão de corretagem, sob o argumento de que se trataria de “venda casada”, o
que é vedado pelo Código de Defesa do Consumidor; ao mesmo tempo em que, há julgados que preveem a possibilidade da comissão ser repassada ao comprador, desde que a ele
seja dada ciência.[1]
O mesmo
ocorre com a taxa SATI, há julgados que entendem ser descabida a devolução pois
o serviço prestado “integraria” o preço da venda[2], da mesma forma
que há julgados que determinam a sua devolução[3].
À parte
a discussão do mérito da questão, fato é que a matéria está longe de ser
pacificada e quem pretender ingressar com a ação de restituição na justiça deve
estar ciente de todas as implicações legais do processo.
...
The buying and selling of property in stand has generated a number of lawsuits, in particular, it has questioned the legitimacy of the collection of SATI rate (a kind of cost of technical assistance that is passed on to the buyer), and the payment of commission (when brokers are hired directly by the developer and the cost does not include the selling price), but as the Court has seen these two issues?
To our knowledge there is no pacified judicial understanding on this issue, which unfortunately leads us to legal uncertainty.
In recent jurisprudential research, it can be featured in an undesirable oscillation in the jurisprudential understanding of the Court of São Paulo and matter. It was observed that there are cameras that have given a refund of brokerage commission, on the grounds that this would be "tying", which is prohibited by the Consumer Protection Code; at the same time, there is deemed to provide for the possibility of the commission be passed on to the purchaser, provided that he is given science.
The same applies to the SATI rate, there is judged to be misplaced understand the return for the service "integrate" the sale price, as there are judged to determine their return.
Apart from the discussion of the merits of the case, the fact is that the matter is far from pacified and who wish to join with the return of legal action should be aware of all the legal implications of the process.
To our knowledge there is no pacified judicial understanding on this issue, which unfortunately leads us to legal uncertainty.
In recent jurisprudential research, it can be featured in an undesirable oscillation in the jurisprudential understanding of the Court of São Paulo and matter. It was observed that there are cameras that have given a refund of brokerage commission, on the grounds that this would be "tying", which is prohibited by the Consumer Protection Code; at the same time, there is deemed to provide for the possibility of the commission be passed on to the purchaser, provided that he is given science.
The same applies to the SATI rate, there is judged to be misplaced understand the return for the service "integrate" the sale price, as there are judged to determine their return.
Apart from the discussion of the merits of the case, the fact is that the matter is far from pacified and who wish to join with the return of legal action should be aware of all the legal implications of the process.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário