The case that culminated with the favorable decision (creating, even preceding to the Court Gaúcha) was based on the establishment of the establishment of a reasoned claim procedure, in which the State Procon understood that the advertising of a company , Veiculated in the Journal, would have been considered misleading, affronting consumer legislation.
in which the administrative procedure to calculate the infraction has two phases (one, in which the consistency of the complaint, and another, in which the merit of the case is considered), the state agency contrary to the , ordered the inclusion of the company's data in the state and national registration of substantiated complaints, a species of a lease, and, only, concluded by the consistency of the complaint, before the effective existence of some kind of infringement of consumer rights .
Because of this, it has been sent to the order against act of the Executive State Coordinator of the State Procon, in order to prevent the inclusion of the name of the company referred to in the final judgment of the administrative procedure. In which the exposed argumentation, the request was rejected.
Since then, the Carpena Advogados team brought an aggravated instrument, which was appreciated by the landings of the 1st Civil Chamber of TJRS. In the decision, the rapporteur ratified the sustained thesis in favor of the company, in the sense that there is no definitive decision to recognize the misleading propaganda, the name of the supplier can not be launched in substantiated complaints.
As included in the decision, In this way, until the final decision of the administrative procedure, that is, until the judgment of the merit of the substantiated claim, the company's data can not be included in substantiated complaints.
Instrument nº 70055873509
