Proving payment of the debt in installments is enough to file a renewal action

nila44

Proof of payment of the tax debt in installments is sufficient to prove the payment of taxes and fees required by the Rental Law (Law 8,245/91) for the purpose of filing the renewal action.


The unanimous understanding comes from the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice in a trial whose rapporteur was Minister Paulo de Tarso Sanseverino. According to the minister, the court's traditional jurisprudence allows proof of payment of taxes and fees after the filing of the renewal action, as long as it occurred before its filing.

In this case, a gas station filed a B2B Lead commercial lease renewal action against the owner of the property, alleging that he leased a fraction corresponding to 50% of the property, for a period of five years, at a monthly value of R$4,500. The owner claimed that the action was lacking, due to the lack of payment of taxes, and also an insufficiency of the rental value offered.

The sentence considered that the station was in default in relation to the property's taxes and fees, which would only have been paid off almost four years after the lawsuit was filed. At the São Paulo Court of Justice, the post claimed that it paid the tax debt in installments, starting payment before the action was filed, although it paid off the taxes and fees during the process.

The TJ-SP understood that simply paying debts in installments, even with the subsequent presentation of proof of payments, would make renewal unfeasible.

At the STJ, Minister Sanseverino stated that the solution should be sought based on a systematic interpretation of item III of article 71 of the Lease Law, “accepting proof of tax installments at the time of filing the demand, with the demonstration of its discharge during the process”.

The rapporteur explained that the taxes were effectively paid through installments during the process. In this sense, “the effects of default during the tax installment authorized by the public entity are uncharacterized”.

For the minister, this measure does not cause any harm to the lessor, “and the payment of the tax debt in installments cannot be considered as a serious breach of the provisions of the lease contract, honoring the maintenance of the pact and the protection of goodwill”.



According to Sanseverino, the jurisprudence of the STJ made the moment of proving this discharge more flexible because it is a procedural rule, and not substantive law. “A fundamental requirement is proof of compliance with the tax obligations assumed by the tenant, which, in this case, occurred in two stages: demonstration of prior installments and proof of subsequent payment of the installments negotiated with the tax authorities,” he said.