Law 14,939/24, published on July 31, makes it more flexible to prove the occurrence of a local holiday at the timing of appeals. The legal amendment modifies paragraph 6[1] of article 1,003 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 2015 (Law 13,105/15).

The aforementioned provision established the need to substantiate and prove the existence of the occurrence of a local holiday when the upgraded appeal was filed. If this obligation was not fulfilled, the appeal would be considered untimely. The allegation was that the higher courts were not obliged to hear all holidays at the local level.

The issue was the target of incessant criticism from lawyers and debates in the courts, upgraded in the Superior Court of Justice (STJ). The situation occurred because the 2015 CPC enshrined the rule of remediation of formal defects in appeals and expressly favored the principle of primacy in the judgment of merit.

Despite this, the STJ, including through the Special Court, analyzed the issue on several occasions and consolidated the understanding that the lack of an official document proving the local holiday, recess, stoppage or cut off the forensic working hours at the timing of the filing of the appeal wasa gross defect and irremediable. In the STJ's understanding, the CPC itself did not consider the mere mention of the holiday  proof at a later timing sufficient.

The change brought by Law 14,939/24, therefore, is very relevant and puts an end to the discussion within the courts. With the new wording of article 1,003, paragraph 6, of the CPC, from now on, if proof of the local holiday is not presented, the court may:

  • summon the appellant parties to correct the formal defect; or
  • ignore the omission, if the holiday is included in the electronic process.

In practical terms, this means that the appellant parties will no longer need to substantiate or prove the existence of the local holiday at the timing of filing the appeal. In addition to ending immediate punishment jointly with – the declaration of untimely appeal – the changing in the rule privileges the extract of the 2015 Code of Civil Procedure.

Despite the sum and effects of the new law, it is definite to monitor the possible discussions on the application of this procedural rule to ongoing legal proceedings. This is due to the fact that the CPC adopts the theory of isolation of procedural acts, so  the rules of a procedural nature have immediate application to pending cases – as provided for in articles 14 and 1,046 of the CPC and in article 6 of the Law of Introduction to the Rules of Brazilian Law.

On the other hand, procedural acts already performed and situations consolidated under the validity of the repealed rule are safeguarded, supported, above all, by the perfect legal act, acquired right or res judicata (article 5, subparagraph XXXVI, of the Federal Constitution).

On some similar occasions, the STJ understood that, in the case of a procedural rule, the rule has immediate application to ongoing proceedings. That is, the new law must respect the procedural acts already carried out and consummated, focusing on those that are pending and cannot retroact to harm acquired procedural rights.

The change brought by Law 14,939/24 opens space for new questions in the Judiciary. It is relevant to monitor future decisions on the application (vel non) of the provision to pending cases that involve the discussion about the timeliness of the appeal due to the lack of proof of the local holiday.

 

[1]"Article 1,003. The time limit for lodging an appeal is counted from the date on which the lawyers, the law firm, the Public Advocacy Office, the Public Defender's Office or the Public Ministry are notified of the decision.

[...] Paragraph 6 - The appellant shall prove the occurrence of a local holiday at the time of filing the appeal."