Audiência de Instrução - Processo: 0813630-53.2018.8.12.0001

Summary

This legal hearing involves a dispute between Lucinete Bárbara Assis Pereira and the utility company Energisa over unpaid electricity bills. Lucinete claims the debt, incurred during her tenant's occupancy, should be transferred to the tenant's name, as the tenant failed to pay the bills. Energisa is unwilling to accept the debt transfer, citing a lack of documentation linking the tenant to the charges. The court granted provisional relief allowing the electricity to be reconnected to Lucinete's property. The case proceeds with testimonies supporting Lucinete’s claim, and both parties are now preparing their final arguments.

Takeaways

• 😀 The case involves a lawsuit filed by Lucinete Bárbara Assis Pereira against Energisa, concerning an obligation to transfer a debt related to unpaid electricity bills for a property that was rented to a third party.
• 😀 The central issue of the case is the responsibility for unpaid electricity bills, which were initially in Lucinete's name, despite the property being rented to a third party who did not pay the bills.
• 😀 Lucinete is seeking a transfer of the debt to the inquilino (tenant) and is requesting a judicial order to restore the electricity service, which had been cut off due to unpaid bills.
• 😀 A provisional ruling (liminar) had already been issued allowing the reconnection of electricity in Lucinete's name, pending a resolution of the dispute regarding the debt transfer.
• 😀 Lucinete attempted to transfer the debt to the tenant but was unsuccessful, as the utility company did not acknowledge or process her request for the transfer of the debt to the tenant's name.
• 😀 Lucinete argues that due to a difficult family situation, including caring for a disabled sister, she had to rent the property and that the tenant (Mauro) failed to pay for electricity during his stay.
• 😀 The defense, representing Energisa, maintains that the company cannot simply waive the debt, as there was no formal request from Lucinete to transfer the debt to the tenant and the utility company has no contractual relationship with the tenant.
• 😀 The issue of whether or not the company can charge the tenant is complicated by the lack of a document proving that the tenant was liable for the debt, especially as the electricity account was in Lucinete's name.
• 😀 The possibility of a settlement was discussed, where Lucinete might drop the claim for moral damages in exchange for the utility company waiving the debt, but the value of the unpaid bills is considered too large to simply forgive.
• 😀 The case has now moved to the phase of gathering testimony, with Lucinete and witnesses providing statements about the events surrounding the tenant's stay, the unpaid bills, and the actions taken by the parties involved.

Q & A

What is the core issue in this legal case?

The core issue is the dispute over responsibility for unpaid electricity bills incurred during the time Lucinete's property was rented to a third party. Lucinete argues the debt should be transferred to the tenant, but Energisa, the utility company, did not comply with her request.

Who is the plaintiff in this case and what is her claim?

The plaintiff is Lucinete Bárbara Assis Pereira. She claims that the unpaid electricity bills for the property she rented out should be transferred to the tenant, who failed to pay for the utility services during their stay. She further claims that the utility company, Energisa, refused to comply with her request to transfer the debt.

What action did Lucinete take to resolve the issue with Energisa?

Lucinete tried to transfer the unpaid electricity bills to the tenant’s name but was unsuccessful. She then sought legal action and obtained a court order to reconnect the electricity service, despite the unpaid bills, as she was unable to resolve the matter directly with Energisa.

What role did the witness, Maria de Lourdes Limeira, play in the case?

Maria de Lourdes Limeira was called as a witness by Lucinete. She confirmed key facts about the tenant (Mauro) operating a business in the rented property, and the timeline of events leading to the tenant’s departure and the subsequent issues with unpaid bills.

What evidence did Lucinete provide regarding the tenant’s departure and unpaid bills?

Lucinete stated that after the tenant, Mauro, left the property in 2017, she discovered the unpaid utility bills under her name. She also described how the property was abandoned, with damage to the house, and how she could not reconnect the electricity without the court’s intervention.

What was the initial decision made by the court in favor of Lucinete?

The court granted Lucinete a provisional measure (tutela provisória) allowing her to have the electricity service reconnected despite the outstanding bills. This was done to prevent further harm, as Lucinete was unable to use the property without electricity.

Why did Energisa refuse to transfer the debt to the tenant’s name?

Energisa refused to transfer the debt to the tenant because they lacked formal documentation that would support the transfer of the utility bill responsibility to the tenant. They argued that no official request was made to change the account holder’s name.

What does Lucinete propose as a possible resolution to the case?

Lucinete proposes that she should be absolved from the responsibility of paying the unpaid debt and that she could continue to pay the regular electricity bills moving forward. She is also willing to forgo any claim for moral damages in exchange for resolving the matter.

What was the key issue raised in the court’s procedural discussions?

The key issue raised was the lack of documentation showing that the tenant was responsible for the utility bills. The court also discussed the responsibility for the debt, as Lucinete's name was on the account, and whether the tenant could be held liable in the absence of a formal agreement.

How does the court plan to proceed after the testimony phase?

After the testimony phase, the court has decided to proceed with the closing arguments. Both parties are given a period to submit their final written arguments, and the case will be concluded for judgment.