The 4th Panel of the Superior Labor Court (TST) ruled that the seizure of a property belonging to a couple, to settle a labor debt of the husband, should only apply to the portion belonging to the debtor. The panel based the decision on the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure, which allows the sale of indivisible assets, but ensures the protection of the co-owner's share. 

The Case 

The property, located in Santos/SP, was seized during the execution phase of a labor claim filed by an electrician against a machinery manufacturer, of which the businessman was a partner. 

The employment relationship lasted from 2011 to 2013, and in 2014 the company signed an agreement to pay R$42,000 to the employee, but did not fulfill the obligation. Without sufficient assets to pay the debt, the partners began to respond with their personal assets. 

The debtor's wife claimed that the property was acquired by the couple in 2010, before the electrician provided services to the company, and that, therefore, it would not have been purchased with her husband's income. 

The Regional Labor Court of the 2nd Region (TRT-2) maintained the seizure of the property on the grounds that the property was indivisible, which would justify its full sale. 

TST Decision 

In the appeal trial, Justice Maria Cristina Peduzzi highlighted that, according to article 843 of the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure, the judicial sale of indivisible assets is permitted, but with the preservation of the co-owner's share. This means that, even if the property is auctioned in its entirety, the seizure can only affect the fraction belonging to the debtor. 

The minister also highlighted that extending the seizure to the property as a whole would violate article 5, item LIV, of the Federal Constitution, as it would result in the co-owner being deprived of her assets without due legal process. 

Furthermore, the decision emphasized that limiting the seizure to the part belonging to the debtor allows for an assessment of whether the measure is sufficient to satisfy the debt, without compromising the rights of third parties. 

Unanimously, the panel granted the appeal, determining that the seizure be restricted to the debtor's share, allowing the sale to occur as a whole, but ensuring the co-owner preference in the auction or the receipt of the amount corresponding to her fraction. 

The decision reinforces the need to protect the rights of co-owners in situations of labor enforcement, ensuring that the debtor's liability does not unduly affect third parties.