Audiência Pública no âmbito do Tema Repetitivo 1.396 | 27.05

Segunda Audiência Pública sobre o Tema Repetitivo 136 do Tribunal de Justiça

Contexto da Audiência

• A audiência pública foi convocada para discutir a prescindibilidade da comprovação de tentativa extrajudicial na caracterização do interesse de agir em ações prestacionais nas relações de consumo.

• O julgamento é originado do IRDR 91 pelo Tribunal de Justiça de Minas Gerais, com implicações que vão além dos interesses das partes envolvidas, afetando milhões de demandas no Brasil.

Participação e Interesse Social

• Foram recebidos 65 pedidos de habilitação provenientes de diversas entidades, incluindo defesa do consumidor e órgãos reguladores, demonstrando o amplo interesse social no tema.

• Para garantir a participação ampla, foram realizadas duas sessões: uma em 14 de maio e outra programada para hoje, com um total combinado de 60 participantes.

Estrutura da Audiência

• Cada expositor tem um tempo fixo de 5 minutos para suas manifestações orais, conforme as diretrizes do regimento interno do tribunal. Esse tempo deve ser respeitado rigorosamente.

• As exposições devem focar em novos ângulos sobre a questão discutida e não repetir dados ou posicionamentos já conhecidos. A qualidade das contribuições será avaliada pela sua capacidade analítica.

Contribuição da ABRAD

Apresentação por Fernanda Medina Pantoja

• Fernanda representa a ABRAD, que reúne concessionárias responsáveis por fornecer energia elétrica a quase toda a população brasileira (99,8%). Isso demonstra uma alta taxa de universalização no acesso à energia.

• Todas as associadas possuem estruturas robustas para resolução extrajudicial, como ouvidorias e plataformas digitais integradas ao sistema consumidor.gov.br. Isso é resultado da supervisão regulatória da ANEL.

Eficiência na Resolução Extrajudicial

• O prazo médio para resolução extrajudicial é inferior a 10 dias com uma taxa de resolutividade em torno de 80%. Este prazo é considerado razoável dentro das normas estabelecidas pelo Tribunal mineiro.

• A proposta sugere que os consumidores possam buscar soluções judiciais apenas após tentativas frustradas na via extrajudicial, enfatizando que o verdadeiro problema reside nos processos judiciais longos e custosos.

Perspectiva do Setor Aéreo

Apresentação por Dr. Luciano Benet Tim

• Apenas um terço dos litigantes tentou resolver disputas administrativamente antes de recorrer ao judiciário; isso indica um uso excessivo dos tribunais em relação às tentativas administrativas disponíveis.

• O setor aéreo enfrenta altos custos devido à litigância; estima-se que judicializar questões relacionadas ao setor custou cerca de R$8 bilhões nos últimos cinco anos, impactando diretamente os preços cobrados aos consumidores finais.

Efeitos da Judicialização

• A judicialização excessiva prejudica a concorrência no mercado aéreo; empresas low-cost enfrentam dificuldades devido aos altos custos associados à litigância e podem reduzir serviços nas regiões menos atendidas como consequência disso.

Argumentos da Febraban

Apresentação por Dr. Fábio Lima Quintas

• A Febraban defende que é legítimo exigir tentativas administrativas antes do ajuizamento judicial em setores regulados como o financeiro sem violar o direito ao acesso à justiça pelos consumidores.

Perfil do Consumidor Bancário

• Com aproximadamente 96% da população adulta brasileira inserida no sistema financeiro, há uma necessidade crescente por canais eficazes para resolução administrativa antes das ações judiciais.

Canais Eficazes

• Os canais administrativos têm mostrado alta taxa resolutiva; cerca de 90% das demandas são resolvidas rapidamente através desses meios.

Importância dos Canais Administrativos

Apresentação por Dra Cristiana Cardoso

• É essencial reconhecer que todos os bancos têm obrigações legais significativas quanto à disponibilização dos canais administrativos adequados para atender seus clientes.

Dados sobre Resolução Administrativa

• Uma pesquisa revelou que apenas 33% dos processos judiciais passaram por procedimentos administrativos prévios; isso destaca a importância dessas etapas iniciais na redução das demandas judiciais.

Consumer Justice and Judicial Efficiency

Overview of Consumer Demand in Judiciary

• In special courts, consumer demands take approximately 1 year and 8 months for knowledge phase and another 1 year and 8 months for execution phase, leading to a total of around 3 years for resolution.

• This prolonged process is detrimental not only to consumers but also to the judiciary, companies, and society at large; only about 9.5% of cases are resolved through conciliation.

Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution

• Consumer service channels like SAC and Procons show a high success rate with a 90% attendance index and over 80% resolution within ten days, contrasting sharply with lengthy judicial processes.

• Requiring consumers to utilize these channels before litigation is designed to expedite resolutions rather than disadvantage them.

Addressing Digital Exclusion

• Consumers who are digitally excluded or face undue obstacles from suppliers should have immediate access to the judiciary as per constitutional values promoting peaceful conflict resolution.

• The legal framework encourages pre-litigation attempts at resolution, which aligns with protecting genuine consumer interests while preventing judicial overload.

Advocacy for Visually Impaired Consumers

Representation by the Association of Cegos Santa Luzia

• Dr. Pércio Martins Chaves da Rocha advocates for visually impaired individuals, emphasizing that higher costs due to judicialization lead to receiving less value in services.

Accessibility Issues Highlighted

• Many products and services remain inaccessible; historical context shows that societal attitudes often reflect systemic exclusion faced by disabled individuals.

Legal Precedents Supporting Disability Rights

• Reference made to DI 5357 by the Supreme Court regarding educational support for people with disabilities; institutions were mandated not to pass costs onto consumers.

Challenges in Financial Services Accessibility

Banking Sector's Response

• Institutions must ensure accessibility; examples include mandates requiring banks to provide materials in Braille as part of their service obligations.

Broader Implications on Market Accessibility

• The lack of accessible payment methods (e.g., touchscreens without tactile feedback), highlights ongoing challenges faced by visually impaired consumers in everyday transactions.

Collective Actions and Consumer Rights

Importance of Collective Action

• Emphasis on preserving collective actions under consumer rights laws ensures continued advocacy without mandatory prior resolutions being required.

Industry Perspectives on Judicial Access

Insights from the Brazilian Association of Incorporators

• Dr. Sofia emphasizes the need for an effective justice system that promotes consensuality in consumer relations as outlined in the Consumer Defense Code.

Critique of Judicial Access Narratives

• Claims that limiting direct access to courts would harm consumers do not hold up under scrutiny when considering time efficiency, method diversity, and cost implications.

Data Supporting Alternative Resolutions

• Research indicates that complaints via company channels are resolved within an average timeframe significantly shorter than judicial processes (4 years).

Cost Analysis Between Judicial vs Extrajudicial Solutions

• Resolving issues directly with suppliers can be substantially cheaper (R$5,000 vs R$41,000 through court), highlighting inefficiencies associated with litigation.

Technological Innovations in Financial Services

Role of Technology Associations

• Dr. Eduardo Alcebiedes Lopes discusses how technology firms advocate for efficient extrajudicial solutions while maintaining competitive practices within financial sectors.

Statistical Evidence on Complaint Handling

• Data shows high rates (80%) of complaint resolutions through platforms like consumidor.gov compared to low percentages reaching judicial systems (less than 7%).

Economic Rationale Behind Extrajudicial Solutions

The rising number of consumer lawsuits suggests a trend where courts are seen as first recourse rather than last resort; this could be mitigated by encouraging prior attempts at resolution through established channels.

Discussion on Consumer Rights and Judicial Access

Introduction to the Debate

• Dr. Gabriel emphasizes the benefits for consumers, highlighting that efficient channels can alleviate pressure on the judiciary and reduce costs for the state.

• Dr. Maria Elisa César Novais from UNESP presents her position against requiring prior extrajudicial resolution attempts as a condition for judicial access.

Empirical Studies on Consumer Platforms

• The discussion includes findings from two empirical studies: one focusing on consumer.gov and another on complaints reported by consumer protection agencies (Procons).

• The first study analyzes data from 2014 to June 2025, revealing significant spontaneous searches by consumers using the platform but lacking satisfaction outcomes.

Misinterpretation of Consumer Silence

• A critical insight is that silence from consumers is misinterpreted as satisfaction; however, it may indicate abandonment or fatigue rather than contentment.

• The study shows a concerning statistic: 83.3% of cases are unresolved, indicating a high rate of dissatisfaction among users.

Limitations of Current Platforms

• While acknowledging the potential of consumer.gov, Dr. Novais argues it functions more as a negotiation platform rather than an effective online dispute resolution system.

• There exists significant informational asymmetry between consumers and suppliers, which could be mitigated through better data transparency.

Transparency Issues in Procons

• Research indicates that only seven out of all Procons surveyed provide transparent and updated data regarding complaint resolutions.

• Institutions like financial services are highlighted as having low resolution rates, reinforcing concerns about their accountability in addressing consumer grievances.

Perspectives from Legal Academia

Positioning Against Extrajudicial Requirements

• Dra. Thaís Santos de Araújo represents ABDEP, arguing against mandatory extrajudicial attempts before accessing judicial remedies for consumers.

Data Supporting Judicial Access

• Citing research from São Paulo's Procon, she notes that many users have never accessed online platforms despite awareness; this highlights digital literacy gaps among vulnerable populations.

Challenges in Digital Justice Implementation

• She points out systemic issues within Brazilian courts struggling to implement digital policies effectively due to inadequate infrastructure.

Systemic Impact on Litigation

Need for Rational Use of Justice System

• Professor Paulo Henrique dos Santos Lucon discusses aligning extrajudicial solutions with international best practices while combating frivolous litigation.

Critique of Current Legal Framework

• He critiques existing legal mechanisms under CPC (Civil Procedure Code), stating they fail to address excessive litigation adequately.

Regulatory Perspectives

Importance of Coherent Policy

• Daniele Pinho Soares Alcântara Crema speaks for Conexis Brasil Digital, emphasizing coherent state policies regarding conflict resolution mechanisms beyond just judicial pathways.

Balancing Access to Justice

• She advocates for recognizing alternative dispute resolution methods without compromising immediate access to justice when necessary conditions arise.

Insights into Consumer Behavior

Understanding Consumer Preferences

• Dr. Luciano Benet shares insights based on research showing that most consumers prefer resolving issues directly with companies rather than resorting to court action.

Vulnerability in Legal Services

• He highlights how cognitive biases affect consumer decisions regarding legal services and suggests enhancing platforms that protect these interests effectively.

Discussion on Urgency in Health Sector Litigation

Overview of IRDR and Health Sector Challenges

• The IRDR (Incidentally, Relevant Decision Resolution) acknowledges urgent situations, particularly in healthcare, but emphasizes that not all cases should be generalized.

• A significant portion of health-related litigation could be managed through customer service channels rather than the judiciary, which is overwhelmed by demand.

• There has been a notable increase in litigation over the past five years, coinciding with advancements in AI platforms like ChatGPT.

Indicators of Abusive Litigation

• São Paulo's Numoped identified concerning trends of abusive litigation within the health sector, including market concentration and high similarity rates among petitions.

• An alarming 84% of cases bypass conciliation processes, raising questions about the rationale behind this trend.

Potential Solutions for Health Sector Litigation

Emphasis on Platform Utilization

• Investing in digital platforms for dispute resolution appears promising for addressing issues within the sensitive health sector.

Case Study: Unimed's Preemptive Measures

• Unimed implemented a system where they must respond to claims via email within 48 hours, resolving 85% of disputes pre-processually.

Perspectives from Consumer Advocacy

Importance of Administrative Solutions

• Dr. Leonardo Garcia argues that litigation primarily benefits lawyers rather than consumers; administrative resolutions are more effective.

Critique of Judicial Access Barriers

• He highlights systemic barriers faced by marginalized consumers when seeking justice and calls for a reevaluation of access to justice frameworks.

Insights from Magistrates

Need for Extrajudicial Attempts Before Litigation

• Magistrate Felipe Albertini Nani Viaro supports requiring prior extrajudicial attempts to establish interest in legal action while allowing judicial discretion in urgent cases.

Addressing Repetitive Demands and Litigant Abuse

• The magistracy faces challenges from repetitive demands stemming from mass litigations that burden both the judiciary and genuine claimants.

Academic Perspectives on Justice System Efficiency

Call for Comprehensive Legal Framework Adjustments

• Dr. Paulo Mendes de Oliveira stresses the need for a nuanced approach to legal frameworks that consider diverse consumer experiences and relationships with suppliers.

Restructuring Access to Justice

• He advocates for structured channels that ensure adequate responses to consumer grievances before escalating matters to court.

Institutional Reflections on Precedents

Role of Precedents in Shaping Judicial Behavior

• Dra. Bianca Medalha Molicone discusses how precedents influence institutional behavior and litigatory practices significantly impacting access to justice dynamics.

Balancing Consumer Protection with Judicial Efficiency

• She argues against conflating effective consumer protection with automatic judicialization, emphasizing rationality within institutional frameworks.

Consumer Rights and Judicial Access in Brazil

Constitutional Framework for Consumer Protection

• The affirmation of consumer rights is ratified by the UN in 1985 through resolution 39248, and further established in Brazil's Federal Constitution of 1988, which emphasizes state responsibility to protect consumers as vulnerable individuals.

• Article 5, section 32 of the Brazilian Constitution mandates that the state will promote consumer protection through legal means, highlighting a commitment to safeguarding consumer interests.

Fundamental Rights and Access to Justice

• The principle of inafastability of judicial power is crucial for ensuring consumers' fundamental right to access justice without conditions or mitigations. This principle is reinforced by Article 170, section 5, which links economic order harmony with consumer defense.

• Following ADC 48 in 1990, Article 4, section I acknowledges consumer vulnerability as a constitutional concern that must be addressed within legal frameworks. This recognition underscores the importance of protecting consumers from exploitation.

Judicial System and Consumer Rights

• The Brazilian judiciary has emphasized that mere protocol numbers are insufficient for resolving disputes; substantive evidence must support claims regarding consumer rights violations. This highlights the need for robust proof mechanisms in judicial processes.

• Article 6, section VI of the Consumer Defense Code (CDC) stipulates comprehensive reparations for damages suffered by consumers, including moral damages and productive deviations caused by suppliers’ negligence or misconduct.

Challenges Faced by Consumers

• There are significant barriers faced by consumers attempting to resolve issues administratively; many lack access to necessary resources such as Procons or internet services in remote areas, complicating their ability to seek redress effectively.

• A cultural tendency towards resignation rather than litigation exists among Brazilian consumers due to perceived inefficacies within both administrative and judicial systems when addressing grievances against large corporations.

Insights from IDEC on Consumer Litigation Culture

• IDEC argues that there is not a culture of litigation among Brazilian consumers but rather a pervasive disobedience to laws by companies that violate consumer rights without facing adequate repercussions from regulatory bodies or courts.

• Research conducted by the Public Ministry reveals that most consumers attempt multiple times (averaging four) to resolve issues directly with companies before considering formal complaints or legal action—indicating a lack of awareness about documenting these attempts for potential future claims.

Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

• Platforms like consumidor.gov.br exist but do not replace traditional expectations for justice; they often serve merely as extensions of corporate customer service channels without sufficient oversight or enforcement capabilities from state authorities.

• Only a small fraction (750 out of over 5600 municipalities) have Procons available for consumer assistance; this scarcity limits access significantly across Brazil’s vast geography where many citizens cannot file complaints effectively due to logistical challenges.

Judicial Outcomes and Success Rates

• Studies indicate that individuals who pursue legal action against health plans, airlines, banks, etc., generally find success in their cases—demonstrating an ongoing reliance on judicial intervention when other avenues fail despite systemic challenges present within those processes.

Regulatory Perspectives on Aviation Sector Challenges

• ANAC highlights Brazil's aviation sector's growth potential compared with developed markets but notes high operational costs hinder competition—factors include fuel prices and excessive taxation contributing to overall market inefficiencies affecting consumer experiences negatively.

Addressing Excessive Litigation Concerns

• ANAC advocates reducing unnecessary litigation through improved regulatory practices while maintaining respect for judicial roles; initiatives include active monitoring and quality assessments aimed at enhancing customer service standards among airlines while promoting alternative conflict resolution methods prior to court involvement.

Conclusion

The discussions reflect deep concerns regarding how best to balance effective consumer protection with efficient access to justice amidst systemic challenges faced both legally and administratively within Brazil’s current framework.