Audiência Cível de Conciliação 09 - Reintegração de Posse - 0809544 39 2018

Summary

In this court hearing, a property dispute is being resolved between two parties. The defendant, Cristóvão Rodrigues, claims ownership of a house where the other family, led by Demerson Vieira and Daiane Silveira, has been living. The judge facilitates a discussion to reach an agreement, exploring possible resolutions, including a compensation offer for the time the defendants have occupied the house. After emotional exchanges and multiple proposals, the parties agree on a 45-day deadline for the family to vacate the house, with the defendant promising to leave behind some belongings. The case concludes with a mutual understanding and a formalized agreement.

Takeaways

• 😀 The judge introduces the parties involved in the hearing, including the public defender, the claimant (Cristóvão Rodrigues), and the two individuals (Demerson Vieira and Daiane Silveira) currently occupying the property in question.
• 😀 The hearing is part of a project to record online hearings for law students to observe remotely.
• 😀 The claim revolves around a property dispute, where Cristóvão claims ownership and states that the defendants moved into the property in March 2023. A court officer confirmed their presence in the house.
• 😀 The judge emphasizes that the goal of the hearing is to attempt an amicable settlement, warning that if no agreement is reached, the court will rule based on evidence presented by the claimant.
• 😀 The defendants express a willingness to negotiate and propose a possible agreement, including a previous offer of 10,000 reais from the claimant’s wife for the house.
• 😀 The defendants explain that they entered the property after being invited by Cristóvão, but there was a falling out due to a drunken encounter, leading to legal action.
• 😀 The defendants claim they are in a difficult financial situation, with limited work opportunities, and request a chance to negotiate a settlement.
• 😀 Cristóvão states he does not wish to sell the property but is open to negotiation. The judge suggests finding a reasonable deadline for the defendants to vacate the property.
• 😀 The judge proposes an agreement, setting a 45-day period for the defendants to leave the property, after which law enforcement may be involved if necessary.
• 😀 A final agreement is reached: the defendants will vacate the house in 45 days and leave behind a bed and wardrobe. Both parties agree to end the dispute amicably, with no further claims or legal action anticipated.

Q & A

What is the primary issue discussed in this legal hearing?

The primary issue is a property dispute where José Andrade and his family are occupying a property claimed by Cristóvão Rodrigues. Cristóvão wants them to vacate the house, but José seeks to negotiate a solution due to his financial constraints.

Why did José Andrade and his family move into the property?

José Andrade and his family moved into the property because they were unemployed and had no other place to live. They were offered accommodation by Cristóvão Rodrigues, though the situation later became contentious.

What was the judge's role during the hearing?

The judge's role was to facilitate a resolution between the two parties, attempting to reach an agreement regarding the property and the ongoing dispute. The judge proposed a 45-day timeframe for José Andrade to vacate the property.

What is the proposed solution for resolving the dispute over the property?

The proposed solution is that José Andrade will vacate the property within 45 days, leaving behind a wardrobe and bed, as per the agreement. Additionally, a financial settlement may be reached to compensate for the period José occupied the property.

What financial compensation is suggested in the agreement?

The financial compensation suggested involves José Andrade paying Cristóvão Rodrigues for the time he has occupied the property. The amount is still to be determined, taking into account José’s limited financial capacity.

What evidence was discussed regarding the possessions inside the property?

Cristóvão Rodrigues claimed that some of his possessions, such as a refrigerator, stove, and other furniture, were removed from the house by José Andrade. However, José denied this, stating that only a wardrobe and bed remained in the house.

What was the nature of the threats mentioned in the hearing?

José Andrade mentioned that he had been threatened by Cristóvão Rodrigues and his associates, who allegedly made threats to set fire to his property. These threats contributed to the tense situation and were discussed during the hearing.

Why does José Andrade feel he is being treated unfairly by Cristóvão Rodrigues?

José Andrade feels he is being treated unfairly because he believes Cristóvão Rodrigues allowed him to stay in the house but later became hostile, making threats after they had a falling out. José also expressed concern about being forced to leave without alternative housing.

What role do the public defenders play in this hearing?

The public defenders represent both José Andrade and Cristóvão Rodrigues. They help facilitate communication, ensure that their clients’ rights are respected, and assist in negotiating a fair resolution.

What was the judge's final recommendation for both parties?

The judge recommended that the parties settle their differences and focus on resolving the issue by vacating the property and coming to a financial agreement. The judge also suggested that both parties avoid further conflict, emphasizing the importance of moving forward peacefully.