Court decision highlights that, without the written contract, it is not possible to prove default or enforce the right to recover the asset

The 3rd Civil Chamber of the Goiás State Court of Justice (TJ-GO) ruled that a repossession lawsuit filed by a consortium administrator is inadmissible if the written consortium agreement is not presented. The court emphasized that the absence of the contract prevents verification of the debtor’s default and, therefore, blocks the legal recovery of the asset.

In the case, the consortium administrator sought to recover a vehicle from a member alleged to be in breach of contract. However, instead of submitting the signed agreement, the company only provided payment slips and a payment history.

Justice Gerson Santana Cintra, who authored the opinion, noted that, unlike secured credit agreements governed by Decree-Law No. 911/1969, consortium agreements are not subject to the same expedited repossession procedure. Therefore, without the original contract, it is not possible to confirm the contractual terms, the obligations assumed, or even the formal occurrence of default.

The ruling underscores the importance of maintaining complete documentation in consortium relationships and cautions administrators about the risks of filing lawsuits without sufficient legal basis. It reinforces that formal written agreements are essential to protecting rights and ensuring the enforceability of claims in court.

Our technical team remains at your disposal for any clarifications or assistance you may require.

Source: https://conjur.com.br