In large-scale contracts, complexity, amounts involved, and time are common causes of conflict between the parties. An effective option to help prevent and resolve these disputes is called a dispute board. This method, unlike mediation, arbitration and conciliation, consists of creating a council of technicians, appointed by both parties, who have the obligation to monitor the execution of the contracted service and issue opinions and opinions, which may be binding. Thus, the dispute board acts before the existence of a conflict, and allows the parties to be able to agree eventual contractual changes with lower costs and in a faster way.
In this sense, public sector bids are conducive to the use of dispute boards in the prevention and resolution of possible obstacles that may impair the performance of the contract. Although this type of method has already been used in previous projects, such as the construction of Line 4 (Yellow) of the São Paulo subway, the contracts signed for the renovation of the stadiums for the 2014 World Cup, the international contracts related to the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the public-private partnership of Rodovia MG-050 and the contracts for the northern section of the Rodoanel de São Paulo, there was no provision in law.
Now, Law 14.133/21 brought, in its article 151, the use of this type of method for application in public administration contracts. In this regard, the provision of the sole paragraph of this article is highlighted, which limits the application of dispute boards to disputes involving available property rights, specifically arising from possible breach of contract. Therefore, access to the judiciary for other disputes is protected.
On February 14, the newspaper "Valor Econômico" published an article in which it was pointed out that the São Paulo Court of Justice had recognized unfair competition in the improper use of a trademark by a former partner. The article, however, does not give the number of the case in which it would be possible to analyze more details of the decision, but it does inform that the individuals had signed a [...]
The General Personal Data Protection Law - Law No. 13,709/18 (LGPD) was published in 2018 and came into force in 2020. This deadline was given to public and private legal entities (processing agents) that collect, store or process the personal data of individuals, in Brazil or abroad, in order to [...]
Recently, the Federal Supreme Court (STF) unanimously ruled that unions can collect an assistance contribution, including from non-member employees, in ARE 1.18.459 (Topic 935 of the General Repercussion), as long as the worker is guaranteed the right to object, establishing the following thesis: "it is constitutional to establish, by agreement or [...]
Recalling the case... It all started at the beginning of 2019, when the brewery Fassbier gave extrajudicial notice to a series of breweries in Rio Grande do Sul for the alleged misuse of the term HELLES, claiming to have exclusive use of the expression, given that the word was registered as a trademark. Not satisfied with [...]
In a recent decision, the STF suspended the processing of labor executions that discuss the inclusion, in the execution phase, of a company that is part of an economic group that did not participate in the knowledge process. In labor proceedings, when the execution phase is reached and the main debtor does not have enough assets to pay the debt, many [...]
The 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ)  dismissed a special appeal filed by the directors of a civil association, which had its legal personality disregarded in a case involving the improper use of a trademark. The Court, in a judgment drafted by Justice Marco Aurélio Belizze, held that the disregard of [...]
Advertising cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant advertisements and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors to websites and collect information to deliver personalized advertisements.