Post by account_disabled on Mar 11, 2024 23:07:56 GMT -5
The electronic auction must correctly indicate, through photographs, the auctioned item. The understanding was adopted by the 1st Chamber of Private Law of the Court of Justice of São Paulo when considering an action to annul a judicial auction, with a request for the return of the amounts paid.
reproduction
Reproduction TJ-SP annuls judicial auction due to discrepancy between advertised and auctioned property
The records show that a real Portugal Mobile Number List estate agency purchased a property from a bankrupt estate, but alleged a discrepancy between the asset auctioned and that actually offered and displayed in photos on the court auctioneer's website. As a result, the real estate company went to court against the bankrupt estate.
In the first instance, the action was dismissed as unfounded. The TJ-SP, in turn, reversed the sentence and accepted the real estate company's request to cancel the auction. For the rapporteur, judge Rui Cascaldi, the bankrupt estate is responsible for the failure in the auction, since it obtained economic benefit from the sale of the property.
"In other words, since the defendant, a bankrupt estate, has received, as recipient, the amount of the price reached for the good sold at auction, it is, indeed, responsible for its eventual return, if the auction is canceled for whatever reason. reason. Otherwise, you would be unduly filling yourself up", he stated.
According to Cascaldi, the Civil Procedure Code does not expressly mention images or photographs of the property to be auctioned, but requires them in a comprehensive and generic way. In the case at hand, the property advertised on the auctioneer's website was completely different from the one sold by the real estate agency that filed the lawsuit.
"It is evident, therefore, that this party was mistaken in auctioning off one asset for another, which is why the judicial sale that took place in this way is voidable, with the strict requirement to restore the parties to their previous state", added the magistrate, who highlighted the " gravity of the error" and a "possible trap" to justify the nullity of the auction. The decision was unanimous.