Court Fees in the TJSP (Court of Justice of São Paulo)

Managing a legal process is not limited to defining the legal strategy. The timing of payment, the amount due, and the expenses that may arise during the proceedings are aspects that need to be closely monitored, both by those who file a lawsuit and by those who respond to it as defendants. In June 2026, the Court of Justice of São Paulo published Joint Provision No. 374/2026, bringing together in a single regulation the rules on the collection and payment of court fees and procedural expenses in the State. Until then, these guidelines were scattered across different communications published over the years, requiring cross-referencing to identify the rule applicable to each situation. With the new regulation, the TJSP now has a single reference on the subject, simplifying the process.

Differences between Court Fees and Procedural Expenses

The provision also reinforces a distinction that often generates confusion: court fees and procedural expenses are not the same thing. The former is linked to the provision of the jurisdictional service itself, while the latter encompasses amounts arising from acts and services performed during the course of the proceedings, such as diligences, notices, and searches in affiliated systems. As the collection of each can occur at different times during the proceedings, this distinction is the starting point for any analysis of procedural costs. The calculation of court fees remains linked to State Law No. 11,608/2003, as amended by Law No. 17,785/2023, respecting the minimum and maximum limits provided for by law, and the new provision goes further by regulating specific situations, such as executions of extrajudicial titles, enforcement of judgments, inventories, voluntary active joinder of parties, and criminal actions.

In enforcement proceedings and judgment executions, extra care is needed. Legislative changes in effect since January 2024 mean that the start date of the process, or the respective enforcement phase, directly influences the applicable rules for collection. In practice, this means that the amount due cannot be calculated in isolation: it is necessary to look at the history of the claim before determining the correct amount. The rule also addresses legal aid, noting that the benefit does not preclude the obligation to pay court costs; in certain cases, it only suspends the enforceability of this payment, according to the conditions stipulated in procedural law. In Special Courts, the exemption from court fees in the first instance remains, except for legal exceptions, but filing an appeal may generate the need to pay the respective fees and expenses, something that should be included in the planning of any appeal strategy.

Refund Systems and Rules

Another point addressed by the provision is the organization of collection procedures according to the system in which the process is handled, with specific rules for eproc and SAJ, in addition to regulations on the restitution of amounts unduly collected. The refund request must be made within the legal deadline, but not every situation allows for restitution: exceptions include the dismissal of the initial petition, withdrawal of the action, redistribution of the process to another State, and the preparation of an appeal that is not admitted.

Practical Impact on Portfolio Management and Litigation Strategy

The main change brought about by Joint Provision No. 374/2026 is the consolidation of rules that were previously scattered, but its effects go beyond normative organization. Knowing the correct amount and the appropriate time for each payment avoids rework, the need for regularization, and procedural discussions about the preparation or expenses of the claim—issues that, although they may seem operational, can impact deadlines and even the admissibility of appeals. This care gains even more weight in the management of portfolios with a large volume of cases: for legal departments, companies, and law firms that handle several claims simultaneously, having clarity about procedural costs allows for more informed decisions about filing, appealing, and the progress of certain measures, always also from a financial perspective.

Joint Provision No. 374/2026 came into effect on the date of its publication and today consolidates, in a single act, the main rules of the TJSP (Court of Justice of São Paulo) regarding the collection and payment of court fees and procedural expenses. More than reducing the need to consult different notices, the new rule reinforces the idea that understanding the costs of each stage of the process is part of the strategy of the claim itself.