Post by account_disabled on Jan 31, 2024 11:19:04 GMT
It is not possible to mix rules from different statutes to favor private pension plan participants, forming a hybrid regime with only the rules that are most advantageous to the beneficiary. This was the understanding of the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice when rejecting the request of a man who wanted to simultaneously receive the most advantageous benefits under different rules of the Fundação Chesf de Assistência e Seguridade Social (Fachesf). He claimed that a ruling that had already become final and unappealable recognized his right to benefit from regulations numbered 1 and 2, because he entered under the first rule and, after an interval, returned when the second was in force.
The Court of Justice of Pernambuco, however, stated Buy Phone Number List that the decision had only established provisions of Regulation 1. According to Minister Villas Bôas Cueva, rapporteur of the appeal at the STJ, such guidance is in harmony with the jurisprudence of the STJ, as the court has already “established the understanding that the combination of different regulations (such as the old and the new) is inadmissible. , to form a hybrid regime, that is, a third regulation”. According to the precedent cited by the minister, “according to the theory of conglomeration, the most beneficial legal status must be sought, focusing globally on the set of regulations of each system, therefore prohibiting the mixing of different provisions” (REsp 1,463,803).
Thus, the definition of the most favorable statute “must be based on the totality of its provisions and not the cumulative application of more advantageous criteria”. the duty of secrecy, such as the exchange of information between financial institutions for registration purposes, the communication to the competent authorities of the alleged commission of criminal or administrative offenses when the resources have a criminal origin, in addition to the revelation of confidential information with the express consent of the interested parties. The legal norm lists several hypotheses in which it is possible to break bank secrecy, directly (article 6) or by granting a court order (article 1, paragraph 4 and others).
The Court of Justice of Pernambuco, however, stated Buy Phone Number List that the decision had only established provisions of Regulation 1. According to Minister Villas Bôas Cueva, rapporteur of the appeal at the STJ, such guidance is in harmony with the jurisprudence of the STJ, as the court has already “established the understanding that the combination of different regulations (such as the old and the new) is inadmissible. , to form a hybrid regime, that is, a third regulation”. According to the precedent cited by the minister, “according to the theory of conglomeration, the most beneficial legal status must be sought, focusing globally on the set of regulations of each system, therefore prohibiting the mixing of different provisions” (REsp 1,463,803).
Thus, the definition of the most favorable statute “must be based on the totality of its provisions and not the cumulative application of more advantageous criteria”. the duty of secrecy, such as the exchange of information between financial institutions for registration purposes, the communication to the competent authorities of the alleged commission of criminal or administrative offenses when the resources have a criminal origin, in addition to the revelation of confidential information with the express consent of the interested parties. The legal norm lists several hypotheses in which it is possible to break bank secrecy, directly (article 6) or by granting a court order (article 1, paragraph 4 and others).