The decision uttered by the Special Court of STJ - Maximum Judgment of the STJ, which brings together the 15 oldest ministers of the Court - was fixed in accordance with Article 543-C of the Code of Civil Procedure:
In the context of compliance with a condemnatory arbitration sentence of pecuniary benefit, the fine of 10% (ten percent) of the CPC Article 475-J of the CPC should focus on the spontaneous payment within 15 (fifteen) days Counted from the attendant of the citation warrant duly fulfilled (in the event of an executive title containing net amount) or the intimacy of the debtor, in the person of his lawyer, through publication in the official press (in the prior settlement of the obligation certified by arbitral judgment) .
Different from the decision uttered by STJ, part of the doctrine and the case-law sustained that the arbitral sentence is not governed by the procedural syncretism introduced by law 11.232 / 05. This is because, the arbitration sentence does not have a prior phase of cognition (a knowledge process), which would only depart the application of the fine provided for in Article 475 J of the Code of Civil Procedure.
According to the STJ, despite the absence of procedural syncretism, the Civil Procedure Code and Arbitration Act [2] attribute an executive title nature to the arbitral sentence. So much so that Article 475-N, IV, of the CPC, clearly expresses that the arbitration sentence is a judicial executive title.
With the recent decision, the STJ supports the discussion and sets the understanding that the fine by non-spontaneous payment of conviction within 15 days also applies in the case of arbitral sentence.
[1] RESP 1102460 / RJ, JUSTED ON 06/17/2015
[2] Art. 31 of Law 9.307 / 2006: The arbitral sentence produces, between the parties and theirs.
