Post by xyz3000 on Feb 12, 2024 7:19:35 GMT
There is no need to issue a letter of formal notice to summon Banco Itaú at its headquarters, in São Paulo, to enforce the sentence. The decision is from the Court of Justice of Paraná. Some customers of the extinct Banestado took enforcement action to receive differences due from the amounts deposited in the savings account due to the monetary update, at the time of the Bresser and Verão plans. As the bank was incorporated by Itaú, the clients' defense lawyer Walber Pydd asked for him to be included as a defendant in the demand. The 1st Public Finance Court of Curitiba accepted the request to incorporate Itaú. But the manager of an agency in Curitiba refused the summons, claiming he did not have the power to receive it.
So the Court ordered the issuance of a precatory letter to São Paulo, so that Itaú could receive the summons at its headquarters. The clients' defense filed an Interlocutory Appeal with the Court of Justice of Paraná, asking that the summons be accepted by the manager in Curitiba. The Estonia Email List rapporteur, judge Miguel Kfouri Neto, understood that the summons by letter of precatory, determined by the first degree judge, would only further delay the clients' rights. The judge also stated that it was unacceptable that “Itaú bank does not have an employee in the District of Curitiba with representation powers, even to manage the business of the now extinct Banestado.
Any Itaú manager would have no difficulty in communicating the existence of the execution to the Legal Department, even more so if we consider the era of the Internet, intranet, teleconferencing — and other modernities that allow instant communication.” Read the full decisionfaced with the refusal of the manager of one of the debtor's agencies to receive the summons, under the pretext that he did not have the powers to do so, asked the d. A single court considered the act of citation to be valid. The MM. The judge, however, understood that the summons from BANCO ITAÚ S/A, in the person of the manager of one of its establishments, “would only be possible if the banking relationship between the parties had occurred at that branch.
So the Court ordered the issuance of a precatory letter to São Paulo, so that Itaú could receive the summons at its headquarters. The clients' defense filed an Interlocutory Appeal with the Court of Justice of Paraná, asking that the summons be accepted by the manager in Curitiba. The Estonia Email List rapporteur, judge Miguel Kfouri Neto, understood that the summons by letter of precatory, determined by the first degree judge, would only further delay the clients' rights. The judge also stated that it was unacceptable that “Itaú bank does not have an employee in the District of Curitiba with representation powers, even to manage the business of the now extinct Banestado.
Any Itaú manager would have no difficulty in communicating the existence of the execution to the Legal Department, even more so if we consider the era of the Internet, intranet, teleconferencing — and other modernities that allow instant communication.” Read the full decisionfaced with the refusal of the manager of one of the debtor's agencies to receive the summons, under the pretext that he did not have the powers to do so, asked the d. A single court considered the act of citation to be valid. The MM. The judge, however, understood that the summons from BANCO ITAÚ S/A, in the person of the manager of one of its establishments, “would only be possible if the banking relationship between the parties had occurred at that branch.