The Regional Labor Court of the 2nd Region (São Paulo) overturned a decision that had held a former partner liable for the payment of approximately R$30,000 in unpaid wages owed by a bankrupt company. The change occurred after Justice Gilmar Mendes of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) accepted a constitutional complaint filed by the businessman, who had left the company years earlier and only became aware of the claim when his personal assets were seized. According to the lawyer in the case, Luiz Eduardo Amaral de Mendonça, the most notable aspect of the decision was the express recognition by the Regional Labor Court itself that it would not apply the Superior Labor Court's (TST) ruling precisely because there was a contrary determination from the Supreme Court.
The central point of the controversy lies in the method of collecting labor claims when the employer is undergoing judicial reorganization or bankruptcy. According to the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF), in these cases, collection should be directed exclusively to the bankrupt estate, with the judicial administrator responsible for organizing the payment. This understanding is based on Article 82-A of the Bankruptcy and Judicial Reorganization Law, included by the 2020 legislative reform, which sought precisely to curb the indiscriminate use of piercing the corporate veil in insolvency scenarios.
The Superior Labor Court (TST), on the other hand, established a different position in the Incident of Repetitive Appeals 26, according to which the Labor Courts can process and judge requests for disregard of legal personality even against companies in judicial reorganization. The exception provided for by the TST itself occurs only when there is an express judicial decision prohibiting the liability of the partners, which in practice reverses the logic of protection that the Supreme Federal Court (STF) sought to enshrine through legislative reform.
This case is yet another chapter in a growing institutional divergence between the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Superior Labor Court (TST), which also hold differing positions on other issues. Close attention should be paid to decisions of this nature, as the constitutional claim has proven to be an effective means of standardization in favor of the Supreme Court's position.
Our office remains available to answer questions and assist in analyzing the impacts of this important decision.
