Post by account_disabled on Jan 30, 2024 12:05:38 GMT 1
The 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul reformed the sentence that condemned Rio Grande Energia to compensate a tobacco producer harmed by the interruption of service in the drying process. For the panel, consumers must also adopt measures to prevent losses or damages. According to the decision, the producer did not take measures to avoid interruption of the energy supply and there was “competence of risks”. Thus, of the damages proven by the expert, the chamber understood that the company should bear only 1/3 of the loss, set at R$ 10,300. In the first instance, the producer claimed to have suffered two service interruptions, but only proved one of them.
In the sentence, judge Marcel Andreata de Buy Phone Number List Miranda, from the 2nd. Judicial Court of the District of Marau, said that the company's responsibility was objective, regardless of fault, and therefore it should repair the damage caused. Furthermore, the judge noted, the company did not prove that the interruption of services was due to “scheduled suspension for network maintenance”, fortuitous events or overload caused by incorrect information about the power used by the smoke dryers. “In an attempt to break the causal link, the defendant argued that it is the plaintiff’s duty to have alternative means to avoid unforeseen events.
However, it is not possible to transfer responsibility as intended by the defendant, by imposing the obligation to obtain an alternative source, since it is their obligation, not the user's, to offer a continuous service”, recorded the sentence. Double responsibility However, when analyzing the appeal filed by the company, the 9th Chamber of the TJ-RS applied, among other provisions, article 945 of the Civil Code: “If the victim has culpably contributed to the harmful event, his compensation will be fixed having take into account the gravity of your guilt in comparison with that of the person responsible for the damage.” The panel followed the understanding of judge Eugênio Facchini Neto, rapporteur. In his vote, the judge built his reasoning based on a panel promoted by the TJ-RS in December 2015.
In the sentence, judge Marcel Andreata de Buy Phone Number List Miranda, from the 2nd. Judicial Court of the District of Marau, said that the company's responsibility was objective, regardless of fault, and therefore it should repair the damage caused. Furthermore, the judge noted, the company did not prove that the interruption of services was due to “scheduled suspension for network maintenance”, fortuitous events or overload caused by incorrect information about the power used by the smoke dryers. “In an attempt to break the causal link, the defendant argued that it is the plaintiff’s duty to have alternative means to avoid unforeseen events.
However, it is not possible to transfer responsibility as intended by the defendant, by imposing the obligation to obtain an alternative source, since it is their obligation, not the user's, to offer a continuous service”, recorded the sentence. Double responsibility However, when analyzing the appeal filed by the company, the 9th Chamber of the TJ-RS applied, among other provisions, article 945 of the Civil Code: “If the victim has culpably contributed to the harmful event, his compensation will be fixed having take into account the gravity of your guilt in comparison with that of the person responsible for the damage.” The panel followed the understanding of judge Eugênio Facchini Neto, rapporteur. In his vote, the judge built his reasoning based on a panel promoted by the TJ-RS in December 2015.