Cesar Peres Dulac Müller logo


Date: October 20, 2020
Posted by: CPDMA Team

The new role of the merchant in the intermediation of the repair of products purchased by the consumer: an analysis of the new understanding of the STJ

Daily we are faced with new realities, and it is inconceivable that we are aware of the incessant flow of information and technological advances that society imposes on us. Just as the citizen cannot keep up with the pace imposed by the current modus operandi of postmodern society, the law is also unable to regulate the new needs that arise all the time.

The act of creating laws, constitutionally attributed to the Legislative Power, is notoriously a slow procedure that, by its very nature, cannot keep up with the accelerated pace of society's advances.

It is in this temporal gap that, on several occasions, the higher courts are provoked to give new contours or even new interpretations to the norm, so that the interpretive meaning attributed is in line with the reality of today's society, not allowing its obsolescence. 

When we deal with the Consumer Defense Code (CDC) - enacted exactly 30 years ago - there is a dynamic similar to the one mentioned above, in which the current social, informational and technological context has been significantly altered, giving rise to new interpretations beyond the formal literality of the law devices. Within this context of constant need to reinterpret and update the rules that the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) decided to change its understanding with respect to who can receive from the consumer purchased products that need to be repaired. 

Well, article 18 of the Consumer Protection Code provides that product suppliers are jointly and severally liable for the defects they present, so that, once the defect is found, the consumer can demand the replacement of the defective parts. 

In addition, paragraph 1 of article 18 establishes that if the defect is not remedied within 30 days, the consumer may demand one of the following three possibilities: a) replacement of the product by another of the same type; b) the refund of the amount paid; or c) the proportional reduction of the value. However, it is important to emphasize, the consumer is conditioned to give the supplier the opportunity to repair the product so that he enjoys the prerogatives of the first paragraph. 

Having made a brief summary of the article of law in question, it is worth pointing out the innovations brought by the recent understanding of the STJ. In practical terms, the reality was that, when a product defect was found, the consumer was responsible for forwarding the product to technical assistance – within the statute of limitations of 30 days for non-durable products and 90 days for durable products. It so happens that the STJ, through the judgment of Special Appeal No. 1,568,938, understood that the entire supply chain (manufacturer, distributor and trader) is jointly and severally liable for the guarantee of quality and suitability of the product to the consumer, in view of that everyone was responsible for making the product available on the market. 

Based on this notion, the STJ understood that it is the trader's obligation to receive products that are defective and to act as an intermediary in forwarding them to technical assistance, unlike what happened before, in which the consumer was responsible for this task. 

Thus, in the opinion of the Superior Court, this new dynamic offers the consumer the opportunity to choose which way will be less costly or embarrassing to exercise their right to have the purchased product repaired, either by taking it to technical assistance, to the manufacturer or directly to the merchant who sold him. 

In this way, the STJ reiterates the protective force that the consumer has in the Brazilian legal system, offering mechanisms that try to balance the vulnerability and hyposufficiency of the consumer in the face of large companies. 

Source: Felipe Meneghello Machado, lawyer for Cesar Peres Dulac Müller.


Recent posts

Corporate name: get to know this asset class

Continuing with our series of posts explaining the differences between the classes of intellectual assets, today we'll look at the BUSINESS NAME. Although trademarks - the nature of which has already been described in the previous post - can sometimes be confused with business names, they are distinct legal institutes. The business name identifies the company by [...]

Read more
PERSE: legislative changes in the emergency program to revive the events sector

Law No. 14,859/2024: amendment of the Perse rules for the period 2024 to 2026. The Emergency Program for the Resumption of the Events Sector - Perse was created in 2021 with a view to helping companies linked to the events sector - the activity most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, by reducing [...]

Read more
The extent of insurance cover in floods

The rains that have hit Rio Grande do Sul in recent weeks have destroyed farms, properties and vehicles. Even if they have insurance, car or property owners should check the coverage of their policies to see if they can get compensation. Basic insurance for cars and properties does not usually cover floods. Insurance against electrical breakdown, [...]

Read more
The agreement to sell the most famous slimming drug of the moment

It was recently reported that the Brazilian company BIOMM has signed an agreement with the pharmaceutical industry BIOCON to distribute in Brazil a drug similar to Ozempic, indicated for the treatment of diabetes, but used mainly to treat obesity. However, this will only be possible because the patent holder of the drug has certainly authorized, through a [...]

Read more
Get to know the “brand” asset class

Continuing with our series of posts explaining the differences between the classes of intellectual assets, today we're going to talk about the TRADEMARK. A trademark is a sign used to distinguish and identify a product or service. It is registered with the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI), guaranteeing the owner exclusive use in [...]

Read more
Intellectual property gives the author, inventor or holder of knowledge the power to protect their rights.

Intellectual property gives the author, inventor and/or owner of the protected knowledge the power to protect their rights, and can, for example, prohibit third parties from producing, using, selling or importing their invention, as well as preventing the reproduction or imitation of their trademark, in addition to guaranteeing exclusivity to the owner of the creation [1] (ARAÚJO; BARBOSA; QUEIROGA; ALVES, 2010). [...]

Read more
linkedin Facebook pinterest youtube lol twitter Instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter Instagram