In yet another example of the Judiciary Branch’s strict stance against abusive procedural practices, judge Carlos Bruno de Oliveira Ramos, of the 3rd Civil Court of Arapiraca (AL), dismissed a lawsuit filed on behalf of an elderly woman against a financial institution, after finding irregularities in the origin of the claim.
During the analysis of the case, it was found that the plaintiff did not know the lawyer who represented her and did not understand the content of the lawsuit, having been induced by a recruiter who came to her home to sign documents without proper clarification. This lack of a real relationship between client and lawyer characterizes a lack of representation, in contravention of art. 34, III and IV, of the Statute of the Legal Profession (Law No. 8.906/94).
The judge classified the episode as a serious ethical infraction, highlighting the OAB’s express prohibition of undue client acquisition.
In addition to extinguishing the case, the decision imposed penalties on the lawyer responsible, including a fine of 10% of the amount of the action, payment of legal costs and loss of suit fees set at 20%. An official letter was also sent to the Brazilian BAR Association – OAB for disciplinary investigation, in accordance with article 32 of the Statute of the Legal Profession, which holds professionals responsible for intentional or culpable acts that harm third parties or the process.
The ruling also draws attention to the systemic damage caused by abusive litigation. The judge emphasized that such practices place an undue burden on the Judiciary Branch and undermine the credibility of the system, citing not only the recent ruling by the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) in REsp 1.817.845/MS, but also guidelines from the National Council of Justice (CNJ), such as Technical Note No. 002/2023, which addresses the fight against predatory litigation.
The case reinforces the growing stance of the Judiciary in combating reckless practices, especially in the context of fraudulent lawsuits filed without the consent of the parties.
However, judicial repression, although fundamental, cannot act in isolation. Curbing abusive legal practice increasingly requires a coordinated institutional response involving the Judiciary Branch, the Brazilian Bar Association, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Public Defender’s Office, and civil society. Each of these actors has specific responsibilities that, if aligned, can create an effective containment system.
The decision by the 3rd Civil Court of Arapiraca is not an isolated case, but should serve as a reference. Judicial proceedings must not become tools of intimidation, undue profit, or statistical manipulation.
Ensuring a dignified and efficient jurisdiction demands constant vigilance and the strict application of legal mechanisms to curb abusive practices. Strengthening procedural ethics, good faith, and loyalty between parties must be a concrete priority – not merely an ideal.
Autor: Annelise Arruda Adames • email: annelise.adames@ernestoborges.com.br
