Post by account_disabled on Mar 11, 2024 0:52:39 GMT -6
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by HSBC Bank Brasil, which requested the analysis of cases of compensation for moral damage, night shift pay and salary differences. The Superior Labor Court did not admit an Extraordinary Appeal involving the aforementioned issues to the Supreme Court.
The rapporteur of the matter, Minister Gilmar Mendes, stated that the Federal Constitution does not require a detailed examination of each of the allegations presented by the parties. He explained that the Constitution only requires that the decision be motivated.
According to Gilmar Mendes, the TST sentence and ruling Austria Phone Numbers List questioned by the institution did not fail to comply with this requirement. The labor court's decision is in accordance with this guidance. According to him, the reasons sufficient to convince the judge were explained.
By denying the merits of the Extraordinary Appeal, the Plenary decided to recognize the existence of General Repercussion in the matter, to reaffirm the Court's jurisprudence, according to which “article , item IX, of the Federal Constitution requires that the judgment or decision be substantiated , albeit succinctly, without establishing a detailed examination of each of the allegations or evidence”.
The bank maintained that the labor court ruling was not properly substantiated. For the bank, the TST refused to analyze all of the premises presented in the Review Appeal. He argued that this constituted a denial of jurisdiction. With information from the STF Press Office.
The rapporteur of the matter, Minister Gilmar Mendes, stated that the Federal Constitution does not require a detailed examination of each of the allegations presented by the parties. He explained that the Constitution only requires that the decision be motivated.
According to Gilmar Mendes, the TST sentence and ruling Austria Phone Numbers List questioned by the institution did not fail to comply with this requirement. The labor court's decision is in accordance with this guidance. According to him, the reasons sufficient to convince the judge were explained.
By denying the merits of the Extraordinary Appeal, the Plenary decided to recognize the existence of General Repercussion in the matter, to reaffirm the Court's jurisprudence, according to which “article , item IX, of the Federal Constitution requires that the judgment or decision be substantiated , albeit succinctly, without establishing a detailed examination of each of the allegations or evidence”.
The bank maintained that the labor court ruling was not properly substantiated. For the bank, the TST refused to analyze all of the premises presented in the Review Appeal. He argued that this constituted a denial of jurisdiction. With information from the STF Press Office.