Gustavo Fernandes Poli

Access to justice is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Brazilian Constitution under Article 5, item XXXV. However, in practice, this promise often fails to materialize for everyone. For debtors in particular, the situation can be even more challenging: judicial decisions such as account freezes, liens, and seizures can severely affect their financial survival even before they have a chance to defend themselves. In this context, the agravo de instrumento (interlocutory appeal) becomes a crucial mechanism to prevent injustices and ensure the right to a full defense.

However, the problem is that this remedy—intended to bring more balance to judicial proceedings—is not always accessible to those who need it most. High costs, bureaucracy, and judicial restrictions often turn the interlocutory appeal into a privilege for a few, rather than a true instrument of justice.

To illustrate, consider the following situations: a small business owner facing temporary financial difficulties discovers that their assets have been frozen by court order, leaving them without any access to cash flow. They are unable to pay employees, suppliers, or keep the business operating. As a result, bankruptcy may become inevitable before they have even had the chance to present a defense.

Likewise, imagine an ordinary citizen who, when trying to pay their bills at the beginning of the month, discovers that their entire salary has been judicially withheld due to a debt. With no time to contest the decision, they are suddenly unable to cover basic expenses like rent, food, and healthcare, further worsening their already precarious financial situation.

These examples are not hypothetical—they reflect the reality of thousands of Brazilians every day. The interlocutory appeal was designed precisely to prevent this type of injustice by enabling the swift review of decisions that may cause irreparable harm.

The 2015 reform of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) introduced advancements by establishing clear criteria for the use of interlocutory appeals. Nonetheless, in practice, many obstacles still prevent this remedy from being broadly and effectively used.

The first major hurdle for debtors seeking to file an interlocutory appeal is financial. To submit the appeal, court fees must be paid, which may be prohibitive for individuals already facing economic hardship. For example, in the São Paulo Court of Justice—the largest in Brazil in terms of case volume—the cost to file an interlocutory appeal in 2025 is R$555.30, which is roughly 37% of the national minimum wage.

Although the Constitution guarantees free legal aid to those unable to afford these costs, this benefit is often denied without a thorough assessment of the applicant’s actual financial condition.

Court Resistance

Another recurring issue is the resistance of some courts to accepting multiple interlocutory appeals within the same case, citing concerns about procedural delay tactics. However, this restriction can be detrimental to debtors who need to challenge various decisions throughout the proceedings that directly affect their financial and personal assets.

While there is a legitimate concern about preventing procedural abuse, it is equally important to ensure that the right to defense is not undermined. The judiciary must strike a fair balance, ensuring that interlocutory appeals remain accessible to those who truly need them.

In this sense, Brazilian justice must not remain merely theoretical—it must be effective and accessible, even to those who are debtors and lack financial means. No one should be prevented from accessing the justice system or appealing a decision simply because they lack resources.

Furthermore, the judicial stance toward interlocutory appeals must be revisited, particularly when a court decision affects essential assets for a debtor’s survival, such as their home, salary, or source of income. The possibility of immediate appeal should be the rule, not the exception, as due process only becomes real when there are effective means to challenge decisions that could cause irreparable harm.

Procedural Balance

Finally, it is crucial that jurisprudence evolves to ensure that the interlocutory appeal is used as a genuine mechanism of procedural balance. The rights to adversarial proceedings and ample defense cannot be compromised by bureaucratic barriers or overly restrictive interpretations.

The interlocutory appeal is a vital part of the Brazilian judicial system, enabling prompt review of decisions that significantly impact people’s and businesses’ lives. Yet, its potential to ensure access to justice remains far from fully realized. After all, justice delayed is justice denied.

In conclusion, the right to due process must be guaranteed swiftly and effectively, so that everyone—regardless of financial status—can pursue a fair resolution to their legal issues. Access to justice must not be a privilege, but a right for all.

Source: Conjur.