TST recognizes caregiver's default due to nine-minute delay in virtual hearing: the importance of punctuality in judicial proceedings

The Superior Labor Court (TST) upheld the decision that recognized the default of an elderly caregiver due to a nine-minute delay in entering a virtual evidentiary hearing, resulting in the application of a fictitious confession in favor of the opposing party. The decision reinforces that punctuality is essential in virtual hearings, according to article 844 of the CLT, which provides for default in the event of the claimant's absence. Although case law has relaxed minimum delays in some cases, the TST strictly followed the legislation, highlighting the importance of strict adherence to schedules. The recommendation for workers and lawyers is to enter hearings at least 15 minutes in advance to avoid setbacks and procedural losses.

Ash Wednesday: Holiday, Optional Day Off or Normal Day? Learn How to Manage Working Hours in Your Company

Ash Wednesday: How can your company manage the working day?

Ash Wednesday is not a national holiday, but it can be an optional holiday in some cities. In the private sector, it is up to companies to define the working hours of their employees, and they can maintain normal working hours, release employees partially or adopt measures such as time banks and compensation agreements. Click on the link for more information and find out how to optimize your team management!

Registration with the Commercial Board and the rural producer's eligibility for judicial recovery

The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) ruled in Topic 1145 that rural producers may file for judicial recovery even if they have recently registered with the Board of Trade, as long as they prove that they have been operating for at least two years. This decision expands access to the benefit, allowing the time of operation prior to registration to be considered. If you are a rural producer and are facing difficulties, judicial recovery may be the solution to restructure your debts and maintain your production!

Union Leader and Just Cause: Understand the Process and Protect your Company

A tire manufacturer has been convicted of granting financial benefits to employees who did not join a strike, which constitutes anti-union practice. The decision reinforces that labor laws protect the right to strike and prohibit any form of discrimination or retaliation by the employer. Financially incentivizing non-participation in a strike movement can result in severe penalties, such as compensation for collective moral damages and administrative sanctions.

Our office has extensive experience and is prepared to guide your company in decision-making and implementation of good labor practices and union relations.

Client Defense in Disputes with Partners

Acting in a contentious corporate case, in which the Client currently has disagreements in relation to the other partners of the transport company, which includes an administrative process before JUCESP and a contentious situation with other partners of the Company, making it necessary to adopt administrative and, if necessary, judicial measures, in order to reestablish its condition […]

Suspension of Profiles and Removal of Electoral Content

Working together with the Client to comply with preliminary obligations in the 2024 elections, regarding the suspension of profiles and removal of videos on the platform, and proof of responses to Regional Electoral Courts around the country.

Legal Consulting on Sharing Compensation Data

We provide legal advice, responding to the client’s questions and drafting an amendment to the employment contract, including the following aspects: 1) the employee agrees that the company (Brazilian legal entity) will share compensation data with the Chinese controlling entity for global strategic and management decisions; 2) the employee agrees and authorizes the company […]

Corporate Pre-Litigation Practice in the Investment Sector

We acted in a corporate pre-litigation in the investment and fund sector, involving millions of dollars. The counter-notification refutes the claim that the partnership relationship began before the formal signing of the contract, confirming that the official start occurred with this signing. We also clarified that the vesting period is 30 months, and we reject the […]