• Rio de Janeiro closing in 3:53
  • Rio de Janeiro closing in 3:53
  • Rio de Janeiro closing in 3:53
  • Rio de Janeiro closing in 3:53
  • Rio de Janeiro closing in 3:53
  • Rio de Janeiro closing in 15:53
  • Rio de Janeiro closing in 15:53
  • São Paulo closing in 3:53
  • São Paulo closing in 3:53
  • São Paulo closing in 3:53
  • São Paulo closing in 3:53
  • São Paulo closing in 3:53
  • São Paulo closing in 4:53
  • São Paulo closing in 4:53
  • Tokyo opening in 3:53
  • Tokyo opening in 3:53
  • Tokyo opening in 3:53
  • Tokyo opening in 3:53
  • Tokyo opening in 3:53
  • Tokyo opening in 0:07
  • Tokyo opening in 3:53

Is the WTO TRIPS Agreement
valid and self-executing in Brazil?

Conflicts Between a Presidential Executive Order Enacting a Treaty and other Sources of Law

As might occur in any other legal system, conflicts between two statutes of the Brazilian domestic law often present interesting questions for jurists. In the intellectual property field, these inconsistencies can occur between a Executive Order of enactment of an international treaty and a domestic statute, including the Constitution. The question is simple: If a self-executing treaty provision is followed in time by conflicting domestic legislation in Brazil, which prevails?

The Brazilian Statute on Conflicts of Laws

Without prejudice to its obligatory effect, the published statute could have had its validity date postponed: in Brazil, the general norm is set out in article 1, of the statute for Introducing legislation into the Brazilian Civil Code, which sets a period of 45 days before a statute becomes binding. However, usually, there is recourse to a special norm to make statutes valid on the date of their publication.

The vacatio legis  legal delay period  in no way annuls or diminishes the statute’s validity. It prevents the enforcement of the duties or exercise of rights that are decreed or conceded, and which will become mandatory on enactment. Publication confers the power to generate obligations and rights on the sanctioned and proclaimed precepts. Vacatio legis merely delays the effects of both rights and duties.

The vacatio legis period is a de facto element of the obligatory force of the law. The devolpment of this obligatory force, once acquired, requires another effective element: a period of vacatio legis that is a fixed period before it comes into effect. The vacatio legis is a time limit. As such, the postulation formulated by KELSEN applies to it:

“For only a norm can establish a limitation of the territorial, personal, material, or temporal sphere of validity of another norm; and norms which limit the spheres of validity of a certain normative order must belong either to this order, thus limiting its spheres of validity, or to an order superior to this order.” 38

Prof. Oscar Tenório teaches that since treaties and diplomatic conventions are not simple administrative and executive acts, being in fact statutes, the vacatio rule is applicable to them, as is all the material on publication.39

38 HANS KELSEN, Principles of International Law, Reinhart & Company Inc. New York, 1956, p. 93.
39 Oscar Tenório, Law for Introducing Legislation into the Civil Code, Liv. Jacinto Editora, Rio de Janeiro, 1944, p. 22, #10.

The Supreme Court Rulings

The 1931 Geneva Uniform Convention on Checks has been an interesting subject of discussion in Brazilian doctrine and in its courts. The basic question consists of how to deal with conflicts between the Uniform Law suggested by the Convention and the 1912 Brazilian law on checks.40 After a short period of uncertainty, due to the classical dispute between the monistic and the dualistic schools of thought,41 the Federal Supreme Court decided that once the Convention was approved by Congress, it should be internally applied, including those rules that conflict with earlier legislation. Justice Oswaldo Trigueiro referred to article VI of the American Constitution and added that “in the U.S., once approved by the Senate, treaties are immediately incorporated in the internal law of the country, a principle which is in effect for almost two hundred years”. 42

Justice Trigueiro remarked that in the U.S. there is an interesting peculiarity, since treaties are approved solely by the Senate, and not by both chambers of Congress. This means that a federal statute, approved by both Houses, can be abrogated by a treaty approved only by the Senate. A second peculiarity is that while regular federal statute cannot alter state statutes, a treaty approved by the Senate can change a state statute, as seen in Missouri v. Holland, decided by the US Supreme Court in 1920. 43

Some years later a Brazilian statute established new rules for the validity of a promissory note including its registration.44 This rule was challenged, since it contradicted the 1930 Geneva Uniform Law on bills of exchange and promissory notes, which does not include registration among the requisites of a promissory note.

Few years later, the Brazilian Supreme Court ruled that a statute that was enacted after a treaty and conflicts with it will be given full effect.45 This system can be compared to article VI of the US Constitution, which considers treaties equivalent to federal statute, rating both categories in the same standing, and therefore lex posterior derogat legi priori the later statute will always prevail.

The 1977 Brazilian Supreme Court decision on promissory notes coincides with the US Supreme Court’s decision in Whitney v. Robertson which establishes that when acts of Congress conflict with treaty provisions, the later in time will be given effect.46

Terms and conditions of international treaties, once incorporated into Brazilian domestic law, are interpreted, applied, modified and revoked in exactly the same way as any other formal and material legislative legal norm. This is the understanding of the Supreme Court, as set out in the ruling handed down in the case of RE #71,154-PR, the ratio decidendi of which is summarized below:

“Uniform law on checks, adopted by the Geneva Convention. Once this Convention has been approved, and duly ratified by the Brazilian Congress, the norms contained therein, including those which change existing domestic legislation, shall be immediately applied…” (RTJ 58/70)

Before this ruling, and as obiter dictum, the same Court referred to a work by Professor Candiota Campos on the Geneva Uniform Law for Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes, and its application in Brazil (RTJRGS, year 1, #2, pp. 1-11 and #3, pp. 1- 10), reproducing the following teachings:

“Once a federal treaty or convention has been legally approved, any Brazilian citizen may invoke it in an extraordinary appeal before the Federal Supreme Court, and its letter will be respected. This means that the text is Statute just like any other. Since, having been received into our domestic legal system it is binding on all judges and courts in the country, which are in this way bound by it in a fashion similar to that found in the USA. It would seem, moreover, that a statute created by adoption of a treaty is on the same and equal plane as those drawn up internally, being in no way superior. Unlike the French Constitution, ours does not contain an express norm that confers predominance on international law. As Bernardo Schwartz puts it, should we admit predominance, we would be conferring not the force of law but the power to restrict the Constitution, and this power may only be established in the very Constitution itself.” (Conflict of Jurisdiction #4,663-SP, in RTJ 48/76, sp. p. 77).

In accordance with the understanding in this precedent, it was decided that the legal norms in a convention or treaty, once incorporated into internal Brazilian law, are submitted to the same jurisdictional competence  State or Federal  as all other legislative norms.47 

Finally, in  a ruling on Extraordinary Appeal #80,004-SE (RTJ 83/809), the Federal Supreme Court summed up a memorable debate among its members by affirming that the principle of lex posterior priori derogat applies to international norms, incorporated into domestic law. Textually:

“Although the Geneva Convention, dealing
with the uniformity law on bills of exchange and promissory notes, is
applicable under internal Brazilian law, it does not predominate over other
laws of domestic origin. The constitutional basis, and consequent validity, of Executive
Order #427/1969 springs from this fact.” [this Executive Order modified the
convention’s regulation on causes for
invalidity of Foreign Exchange Bonds].

For a summary of the cases in which the STF or the STJ decided on conflicts
between treaties and domestic statutes, see NADIA ARAUJO et al, Resumos
de Jurisprudência do STF e STJ Sobre Conflicto de Fontes (Cadernos da PUC-Rio
II, #3, 1997).

The Opinion of Commentators

Prof. Dolinger explains that when considering these types of conflicts the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) has applied the later in time rule, with a few important exceptions.48 While explaining the dichotomy between the municipal law and the Portuguese translation of international treaties, Prof. Dolinger quotes Hildebrando Accioly, an authority in Brazilian public international law. Accioly wrote that “[i]n practice, the result of the incorporation of international law into internal law is that earlier inconsistent statutes are implicitly revoked.”49

Prof. Celso Albuquerque Mello argues for the supremacy of treaties over domestic laws in Brazil, and quotes União Federal v. Cia Rádio Internacional do Brasil (1951), a case decided unanimously by the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF). In that case, the Court held that a treaty revoked a prior inconsistent domestic law.50 While writing about the influence of American constitutional law on the Brazilian legal system Prof. Dolinger discusses a 1977 Brazilian Supreme Court decision on promissory notes.51 He points out that this decision coincides with the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Whitney v. Robertson regarding the later in time rule. He also explains that when acts of Congress conflict with treaty provisions, the later in time rule will be applied.

The principle of lex posterior derogat legi priori establishes that a legal instrument which last takes effect supersedes any earlier instrument on point. The Brazilian Supreme Court seems to have generally applied this principle, albeit with a few important exceptions. However, some authors contend that under Brazilian law some international treaties and conventions are superior to ordinary laws and may only be abrogated or superseded through constitutional provisions.52  They claim that Brazilian Law also considers some international treaties and conventions to be superior to federal statutes, and that abrogation or revocation is effected only through constitutional provisions. This conclusion follows from the arguments supported by Prof. Celso Mello and Prof. Valladão,53 both of whom have written that article 98 of the Brazilian National Tax Code, which establishes the supremacy of treaties over statutes whatever their chronological order, can be applied to all other fields of Brazilian law.54 This is the case regarding GATT and Taxation Law, where some State Supreme Courts and the Federal Supreme Court (STF) have already decided cases rendering any conflicting statutes enacted after GATT invalid.

In addition to this exception, the principle governing the resolution of the conflict is the later in time rule, where the later statute prevails over the earlier one (Lex posterior derogat legi priori).

The TRIPS Agreement was fully implemented into Brazilian domestic law on January 1, 1995. Approximately fourteen months later, Statute 9,279/96 was enacted, derogating every TRIPS provision (as implemented by the Portuguese translation annexed to the presidential Executive Order) conflicting with the rules in the newly enacted statute.

40 Decree No. 2.591, August 7, 1912.

41 On the monistic and dualistic schools, see Louis Henkin, Richard Pugh, Oscar Schachter and Hans Smith, International Law3⁄4Cases and Materials 118, n. 3 (1980).

42 Extraordinary Appeal #71,154,58 RTJ 70 (1971).

43 See William B. Lockhart, Yale Kamisar, Jesse H. Choper and Steven H. Shiffrin, Constitutional Law3⁄4Cases3⁄4Comments3⁄4Questions 155 (6 th  ed. 1986).

44 Executive Order 427 of 1969 which stipulated that every promissory note should be registered at the Ministry of Financewithin 15 days of its execution, as a condition for being usable, a measure aimed to diminish the secondary, non-official economic  market, fed on non-declared profits and fortunes; this Executive Order was revoked ten years latter by Executive Order-law 1.700 of 1979.

45 Extraordinary Appeal #80,004, 83 RTJ 809, 827 (1977).

46 See Laurence H. Tribe, American Constitutional Law 226 (1988), and Jerome Barron and C. Thomas Dienes, Constitutional Law 101 (1986).

47 CELIO BORJA, Patente de invenção – acordo internacional – vigência, in Revista  de Direito Administrativo, Renovar, julho 1998, p. 328.

48 For an in-depth study of the conflicts between municipal and international law, see Jacob Dolinger, Brazilian Supreme Court Solutions for Conflicts Between Domestic and International Law: An Exercise in Eclectism, 22 Cap. U. L. Rev. 1041, 1043 (1993).

49 Hildebrando Accioly, 1 Tratado de Direito Internacional Público 18 (1933) p. 1054.

50 Apelação Cível #9,587.

51 Recurso Extraordinário #80,004, 83 RTJ 809, 827 (1977) cited in Jacob Dolinger, The Influence of American Constitutional Law on the Brazilian Legal System; 38 American Journal of Comparative Law 803, 826-7.

52  See Haroldo Valladão, Direito Internacional Privado, Vol. 1, p. 96 (1980) (reasoning that Article 98 of the Brazilian National Tax Code, which establishes the supremacy of treaties over statutes whatever their chronological order, can be applied to all other fields of Brazilian law).

53 Haroldo Valladão, 1 Direito Internacional Privado 96 (1980) p.

54 Executive Order #5,172 of October 25, 1966.

1 Decisions that apply an Executive Order
(Presidential Decree a_er consent from the Brazilian National Congress): AI
6514737 AgR and Rcl 13882 (STF), AgRg no REsp 1131808 (STJ), REsp 256387 (STJ),
REsp 667025 and REsp 1145637 (STJ), REsp 1201454 (STJ) , AC 2007.34.00.024412-2
(TRF1), AG 2008.01.00.031461-2 (TRF1), AGA 2007.01.00.036384-8 (TRF1), AI
2007.01.00.017916-0 (TRF1), and EDcl na AC 2007.34.00.024412-2 (TRF1), AC 198851010029353
(TRF2), AC 96.02.40741-7 (TRF2), AC 98.02.33886-9 (TRF2), AC
1988.51.01.013118-4 (TRF2), AC 2001.51.01.531698-3 (TRF2), AMS 91.02.00186-1
(TRF2), REOMS 96.02.30412-0 (TRF2), AI 0038055-35.2012.4.01.0000 (TRF1), AC
0001855-54.2014.4.02.5101 (TRF2), AC 0001854-69.2014.4.02.5101 (TRF2), AI
0000360-15.2015.4.02.0000 (TRF2), REEX 0132349-41.2013.4.02.5101 (TRF2), ED AC
0811384-40.2009.4.02.5101 (TRF2) and AI 0107242-35.2014.4.02.0000 (TRF2).

2 Decisions that do not apply any
Executive Orders (Presidential Decree a_er consent from the Brazilian National
Congress): AC 2008.34.00.016643-4 (TRF1), AC 2001.51.01.538718-7 and AC
2005.51.01.522481-4 (TRF2).

1.   Opinion of Justices Carlos Velloso, Marco Aurélio, Maurício Corrêa and Nelson Jobim. Session headed by Justice Carlos Velloso.

2.   Opinion of Justices Ilmar Galvão, Sydney Sanches, Octavio Gallotti and Sepúlveda Pertence. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

3.   Opinion of Justices Ilmar Galvão, Sydney Sanches, Sepúlveda Pertence and Ellen Gracie. Session headed by Justice Moreira Alves.

4.   Opinion of Justices Maurício Corrêa, Celso de Mello, Carlos Velloso and Nelson Jobim. Session headed by Justice Néri Da Silveira.

5.   Opinion of Justices Moreira Alves, Sydney Sanches, Sepúlveda Pertence, Ilmar Galvão and Ellen Gracie. Session headed by Justice Moreira Alves. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the São Paulo State RE and rejected the Contibrasil Comércio e Exportação LTDA’s RE.

6.   Opinion of Justices Nelson Jobim, Carlos Velloso, Maurício Corrêa and Gilmar Mendes.

7.   Opinion of Justices Celso de Mello, Carlos Velloso, Maurício Corrêa and Gilmar Mendes.

8.   Opinion of Justices Eros Grau, Marco Aurélio, Cezar Peluso and Carlos Britto. Session headed by Justice Sepúlveda Pertence.

9.   Opinion of Justices Cezar Peluso, Marco Aurélio, Carlos Britto and Eros Grau. Session headed by Justice Sepúlveda Pertence.

10.   Opinion of Justices Ilmar Galvão, Ellen Gracie, Sepúlveda Pertence, Marco Aurélio, Celso de Mello, Gilmar Mendes, Cezar Peluso, Joaquim Barbosa, Eros Grau, Ricardo Lewandowski and Cármen Lúcia. Session headed by Justice Ellen Gracie.

11.   Opinion of Justices Ellen Gracie, Celso de Mello, Marco Aurélio, Gilmar Mendes, Cezar Peluso, Carlos Britto, Joaquim Barbosa, Ricardo Lewandowski, Menezes Direito and Cármen Lúcia.

12.   Opinion of Justices Eros Grau, Gilmar Mendes, Cezar Peluso and Joaquim Barbosa. Session headed by Justice Celso de Mello.

13.   Opinion of Justices Marco Aurélio, Carlos Britto, Ricardo Lewandowski, Cármen Lúcia and Menezes Direito. Session headed by Justice Marco Aurélio.

14.   Opinion of Justices Cármen Lúcia, Menezes Direito, Ricardo Lewandowski, Marco Aurélio, Eros Grau, Joaquim Barbosa, Carlos Britto, Ellen Gracie and Gilmar Mendes. Session headed by Justice Gilmar Mendes. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the ADPF (Claim of non-compliance with fundamental precept).

15.   Opinion of Justices Gilmar Mendes, Cármen Lúcia, Eros Grau and Celso de Mello partially accepted the appeal in respect of the CSLL (Social Contribution on Net Profit) and Justices Marco Aurélio, Menezes Direito and Cezar Peluso partially accepted the appeal in respect of the CPMF (Provisional Contribution on Finance Transactions) and Justices Ricardo Lewandowski, Ellen Gracie and Carlos Britto rejected the appeal. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

16.   Opinion of Justices Marco Aurélio, Menezes Direito, Ricardo Lewandowski, Ayres Britto, Ellen Gracie and Joaquim Barbosa rejected the appeal and Justices Gilmar Mendes, Cármen Lúcia, Eros Grau, Cezar Peluso and Celso de Mello accepted the appeal. Session headed by Justice Cezar Peluso. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

17.   Opinion of Justices Dias Toffoli, Marco Aurélio, Luiz Fux and Ricardo Lewandowski.

18.   Opinion against general repercussion by Justices Cezar Peluso, Ricardo Lewandowski and Celso de Mello. Justice Gilmar Mendes did not give his opinion.

19.   Opinion of Justices Dias Toffoli, Marco Aurélio, Luiz Fux, Cármen Lúcia and Rosa Weber.

20.   Opinion of Justices Dias Toffoli, Marco Aurélio, Luiz Fux and Rosa Weber.

21.   Opinion of Justices Rosa Weber, Luiz Fux, Marco Aurélio and Dias Toffoli. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

22. Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Marco Aurélio and Roberto Barroso. Session headed by Justice Rosa Weber

23.   Opinion of Justices Milton Pereira, Cesar Asfor Rocha, Democrito Reinaldo and Gomes De Barros. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

24.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

25.   Opinion of Justices Democrito Reinaldo, Milton Luiz Pereira, Cesar Asfor Rocha and Garcia Vieira. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

26.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, Cesar Asfor Rocha, Garcia Vieira and Democrito Reinaldo. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

27.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, José de Jesus Filho and Democrito Reinaldo. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

28.   Opinion of Justices Cesar Asfor Rocha, Garcia Vieira, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

29.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira and Cesar Asfor Rocha. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes De Barros.

30.   Opinion of Justices Cesar Asfor Rocha, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

31.   Opinion of Justices Antônio De Pádua Ribeiro, Hélio Mosimann, Peçanha Martins and Americo Luz. Session headed by Justice Hélio Mosimann.

32.   Opinion of Justices Cesar Asfor Rocha, José de Jesus Filho, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

33.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José de Jesus Filho, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

34.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, Cesar Asfor Rocha, Democrito Reinaldo. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

35.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, José de Jesus Filho and Democrito Reinaldo. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

36.   Opinion of Justices Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira and José de Jesus Filho. Session headed by Justice Democrito Reinaldo.

37.   Opinion of Justices Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira and José de Jesus Filho. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes De Barros.

38.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, José de Jesus Filho and Democrito Reinaldo. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes De Barros.

39.   Opinion of Justices Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado and José de Jesus Filho. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes De Barros.

40.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, José de Jesus Filho, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes De Barros.

41.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, José de Jesus Filho, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes De Barros.

42.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, Ari Pargendler, José Delgado, Antonio de Padua Ribeiro, José de Jesus Filho, Peçanha Martins and Democrito Reinaldo. Session headed by Justice Hélio Mosimann. The Prosecutor’s Opinion rejected the Order..

43.   Opinion of Justices Ari Pargendler, Helio Mosimann, Peçanha Martins and Adhemar Maciel. Session headed by Justice Peçanha Martins.

44.   Opinion of Justices Ari Pargendler, Helio Mosimann, Peçanha Martins and Adhemar Maciel. Session headed by Justice Peçanha Martins.

45.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes De Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Milton Luiz Pereira.

46.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, Adhemar Maciel, Ari Pargendler, Humberto Gomes de Barros, dissenting votes, Garcia Vieira and Hélio Mosimann. Session headed by Justice Peçanha Martins.

47.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Democrito Reinaldo, Milton Luiz Pereira and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Milton Luiz Pereira.

48.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Garcia Vieira, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes de Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice Milton Luiz Pereira. O parecer do MPF foi no sentido de não se conhecer do recurso e, no caso do conhecimento, não se dar provimento ao mesmo.

49.   Opinion of Justices Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, José Degaldo and Garcia Vieira. Session headed by Justice Milton Luiz Pereira.

50.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Democrito Reinaldo, Humberto Gomes de Barros and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

51.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

52.   Opinion of Justices Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Paulo Gallotti, Franciulli Netto and Nancy Andrighi. Session headed by Justice Peçanha Martins.

53.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

54.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

55.   Opinion of Justices Paulo Gallotti, Franciulli Netto, Castro Filho, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Francisco Peçanha Martins.

56.   Opinion of Justices Paulo Gallotti, Franciulli Netto, Castro Filho, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Francisco Peçanha Martins.

57.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and Castro Filho. Session headed by Justice Francisco Peçanha Martins.

58.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and Castro Filho. Session headed by Justice Francisco Peçanha Martins.

59.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

60.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Garcia Vieira. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

61.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

62.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

63.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

64.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

65.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira and Milton Luiz Pereira. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

66.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Franciulli Netto, Castro Filho, Garcia Vieira, Milton Luiz Pereira and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

67.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, Castro Filho, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Francisco Peçanha Martins.

68.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

69.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, Castro Filho, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Francisco Peçanha Martins.

70.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Milton Luiz Pereira and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

71.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

72.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

73.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

74.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

75.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

76.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

77.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

78.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

79.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Humberto Gomes de Barros and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

80.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Garcia Vieira. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

81.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Garcia Vieira and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

82.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Eliana Calmon, Castro Filho and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Humberto Gomes de Barros.

83.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

84.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

85.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Paulo Medina and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

86.   Opinion of Justices Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

87.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Garcia Vieira and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

88.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and Laurita Vaz. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

89.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and Laurita Vaz. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

90.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and Laurita Vaz. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon

91.   Opinion of Justices Laurita Vaz, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

92.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz and Paulo Medina. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

93.   Opinion of Justices Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

94.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

95.   Opinion of Justices Milton Luiz Pereira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Garcia Vieira. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

96.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

97.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Garcia Vieira and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

98.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

99.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

100.   Opinion of Justices Paulo Medina, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and Laurita Vaz. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

101.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

102.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz and Paulo Medina. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

103.   Opinion of Justices Garcia Vieira, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

104.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

105.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

106.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Garcia Vieira, Humberto Gomes de Barros and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

107.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

108.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

109.   Opinion of Justices Laurita Vaz, Paulo Medina, Luiz Fux, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

110.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Humberto Gomes de Barros and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

111.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Paulo Medina and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

112.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

113.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Paulo Medina and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

114.   Opinion of Justices Laurita Vaz, Luiz Fux, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Francisco Falcão and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice José Delgado.

115.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

116.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

117.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

118.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

119.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

120.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

121.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

122.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

123.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

124.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

125.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

126.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

127.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

128.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

129.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

130.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

131. Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

132.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

133.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

134.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, eori Albino Zavascki, Humberto Gomes de Barros, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

135.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

136.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

137.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

138.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Francisco Peçanha Martins (vencido), João Otávio de Noronha and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto

139.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio De Noronha.

140.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

141.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

142.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

143.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Gomes De Barros, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda and Franciulli Netto (vencido). Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

144.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira and Francisco Peçanha Martins (vencido). Session headed by Justice                      Franciulli Netto.

145.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

146.   Opinion of Justices Fernando Gonçalves, Aldir Passarinho Junior, Barros Monteiro and Cesar Asfor Rocha. Session headed by Justice Aldir Passarinho Junior

147.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

148.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli       Netto.        

149.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

150.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

151.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Francisco Peçanha Martins, José Delgado, Franciulli Netto, Luiz Fux and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

152.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

153.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

154.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

155.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

156.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

157.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

158.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

159.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

160.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Presidiu o julgamento o Sr. Franciulli Netto.

161.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

162.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

163.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

164.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

165.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão, Franciulli Netto, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Castro Meira. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

166.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

167.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira and Francisco Peçanha Martins. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

168.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki (vencido), Luiz Fux (vencido), José Delgado, Denise Arruda and Francisco Falcão.

169.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

170.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

171.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

172.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Franciulli Netto, Luiz Fux and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice Eliana Calmon.

173.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

174.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio De Noronha.

175.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha and Castro Meira. Session headed by Justice Franciulli Netto.

176.   Opinion of Justices Carlos Alberto M. Direito, Nancy Andrighi, Castro Filho, Antônio de Pádua Ribeiro and Humberto Gomes de Barros. Session headed by JusticeNancy Andrighi. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

177.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins (vencido), Eliana Calmon and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

178.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

179.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and Franciulli Netto. Session headed by Justice João Otávio De Noronha.

180.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

181.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins (vencido), Castro Meira, Eliana Calmon, Franciulli Netto and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

182.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

183.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

184.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

185.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

186.   Opinion of Justices Franciulli Netto, João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

187.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki (vencido), Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

188.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

189.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

190.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

191.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, Francisco Peçanha Martins and Francisco Falcão, and Justice Luiz Fux had their votes dissented. Justices João Otávio de Noronha, Castro Meira and José Delgado. Session headed by JusticeEliana Calmon.

192.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Francisco Peçanha Martins, Eliana Calmon and João Otávio de Noronha. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha

193.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

194.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

195.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio de Noronha.

196.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

197.   Opinion of Justices Castro Filho, Humberto Gomes de Barros, Carlos Alberto Menezes Direito and Nancy Andrighi. Session headed by Justice Castro Filho. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

198.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

199.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

200.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

201.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

202.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice João Otávio De Noronha.

203.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Castro Meira (vencido), Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, José Delgado and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

204.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, José Delgado and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

205.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

206.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

207.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

208.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Peçanha Martins, José Delgado, Eliana Calmon, Luiz Fux, João Otávio de Noronha, Teori Albino Zavascki, Castro Meira and Denise Arruda. Session headed by Justice Francisco Falcão.

209.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

210.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

211.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

212.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and José Delgado. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

213.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

214.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado (vencido), Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki

215.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Carlos Fernando Mathias and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

216.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Carlos Fernando Mathias (Juiz convocado do TRF 1st Circuit) José Delgado, Eliana Calmon and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

217.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Carlos Fernando Mathias and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

218.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Carlos Fernando Mathias and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

219.   Opinion of Justices José Delgado, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

220.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Carlos Fernando Mathias and Eliana Calmon Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

221.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, José Delgado, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

222.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Hamilton Carvalhido, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by JusticeDenisa Arruda.

223.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, Hamilton Carvalhido and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

224.   Opinion of Justices Denise Arruda, Hamilton Carvalhido, Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux and Teori Albino Zavascki. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

225.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda (Presidenta) and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

226.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Hamilton Carvalhido, Eliana Calmon and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

227.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

228.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

229.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon and Castro Meira. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

230.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

231.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Benedito Gonçalves, Eliana Calmon and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Luiz Fux.

232.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

233.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

234.   Opinion of Justices Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, Benedito Gonçalves, Francisco Falcão and Luiz Fux. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

235.   Opinion of Justices Francisco Falcão, Luiz Fux, Denise Arruda and Benedito Gonçalves. Session headed by Justice Denise Arruda.

236.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Denise Arruda, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Benedito Gonçalves, Eliana Calmon and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

237.   Justice Ari Pargendler, in his opinion, acknowleged the enforcement of TRIPS as a treaty that forces individuals rather than just the State, however reporting Justice’s opinion was otherwise.

238.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon and Castro Meira. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

239.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon and Castro Meira. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

240.   Opinion of Justices Hamilton Carvalhido, Eliana, Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques and Benedito Gonçalves. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

241.   Opinion of Justices Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins and Herman Benjamin. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

242.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

243.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda, Benedito Gonçalves and Francisco Falcão. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

244.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon and Castro Meira. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

245.   Opinion of Justices Benedito Gonçalves, Francisco Falcão, Teori Albino Zavascki and Denise Arruda. Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

246.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

247.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira.

248.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Castro Meira. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

249.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

250.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

251.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

252.   Opinion of Justices Benedito Gonçalves, Teori Albino Zavascki, Denise Arruda and Luiz Fux (vencido). Session headed by JusticeDenise Arruda.

253.   Opinion of Justices Srs. Ministros Vasco Della Giustina, Paulo Furtado (Desembargador convocado do TJ/BA), Nancy Andrighi, Massami Uyeda and Sidnei Beneti. Session headed by Justice Sidnei Beneti. O parecer do MPF foi no sentido de dar provimento ao Recurso Especial.

254.   Opinion of Justices Sidnei Beneti, Vasco Della Giustina (Invited appellate judge from TJ/RS), Paulo Furtado (Desembargador convocado do TJ/BA), Nancy Andrighi and Massami Uyeda. Session headed by Justice Sidnei Beneti. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

255.   Opinion of Justices Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins and Herman Benjamin. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

256.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

257.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki, Benedito Gonçalves and Hamilton Carvalhido. Session headed by Justice Benedito Gonçalves.

258.   Opinion of Justices João Otávio De Noronha, Luis Felipe Salomão, Vasco Della Giustina (Desembargador convocado do TJ/RS), Honildo Amaral de Mello Castro (Invited Appellate Judge from TJ/AP) and Aldir Passarinho Junior and Sidnei Beneti. Session headed by Justice Massami Uyeda.

259.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell, Marques and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

260. Opinion of Justices Hamilton Carvalhido, Eliana Calmon, Ministros Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques and Benedito Gonçalves. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

261.   Opinion of Justices Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Benedito Gonçalves, Hamilton Carvalhido and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

262.   Opinion of Justices Benedito Gonçalves, Hamilton Carvalhido, Luiz Fux, Teori Albino Zavascki and Arnaldo Esteves Lima. Session headed by Justice Benedito Gonçalves.

263.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

264.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin and Mauro Campbell Marques. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

265.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques and Eliana Calmon. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

266.   Opinion of Justices Eliana Calmon (vencida), Castro Meira (relator para o acórdão), Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Benedito Gonçalves and Hamilton Carvalhido. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the Order.

267.   Opinion of Justices Luis Felipe Salomão, Raul Araújo, Maria Isabel Gallotti and João Otávio de Noronha. Presidiu o Julgamento o Sr. Ministro João Otávio de Noronha.

268.   Opinion of Justices Hamilton Carvalhido, Luiz Fux, Castro Meira, Arnaldo Esteves Lima, Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Benedito Gonçalves and Cesar Asfor Rocha. Session headed by Justice Teori Albino Zavascki.

269.   Opinion of Justices Luis Felipe Salomão, Raul Araújo, Maria Isabel Gallotti, Aldir Passarinho Junior and João Otávio de Noronha. Presidiu o Julgamento o Sr. Ministro João Otávio de Noronha.

270.   Opinion of Justices Paulo De Tarso Sanseverino, Vasco Della Giustina (Desembargador convocado do TJ/RS), Nancy Andrighi and Massami Uyeda. Session headed by Justice Massami Uyeda.

271.   Opinion of Justices Vasco Della Giustina, Nancy Andrighi, Massami Uyeda, Sidnei Beneti and Paulo de Tarso Sanseverino. Session headed by Justice Massami Uyeda.

272.   Opinion of Justices Mauro Campbell Marques, Cesar Asfor Rocha, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins and Herman Benjamin. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

273.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Cesar Asfor Rocha, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

274.   Opinion of Justices Sidnei Beneti, Paulo de Tarso Sanseverino, Ricardo Villas Bôas Cueva and Massami Uyeda. Session headed by Justice Massami Uyeda.

275.   Opinion of Justices Mauro Campbell Marques, Castro Meira, Humberto Martins and Herman Benjamin. Session headed by Justice Herman Benjamin.

276.   Opinion of Justices Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Cesar Asfor Rocha, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Herman Benjamin.

277.   Opinion of Justices Humberto Martins, Herman Benjamin, Mauro Campbell Marques, Cesar Asfor Rocha and Castro Meira. Session headed by Justice Herman Benjamin.

278.   Opinion of Justices Castro Meira, Arnaldo Esteves Lima, Herman Benjamin, Napoleão Nunes Maia Filho, Mauro Campbell Marques, Benedito Gonçalves, Diva Malerbi (Invited Appellate Justic from the TRF 3rd Circuit) and Ari Pargendler. Session headed by Justice Humberto Martins.

279.   Opinion of Justices Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Mauro Campbell Marques.

280.   Opinion of Justices Mauro Campbell Marques, Eliana Calmon, Castro Meira and Humberto Martins. Session headed by Justice Mauro Campbell Marques.

281.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

282.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

283. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

284.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not give any opinion on this matter.

285.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

286.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not give any opinion on this matter.

287.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appellant’s and rejected the National Treasury’s appeal.

288.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal to dismiss the precedent judgement and on the merits, to deny legal certainty.

289.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the National Treasury’s appeal and rejected the Appellant’s appeal.

290.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

291.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

292.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

293.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

294.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

295.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not give any opinion on this matter.

296.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

297.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

298.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

299.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

300.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

301.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not give any opinion on this matter.

302.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

303.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

304.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

305.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

306.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

307.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

308.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

309.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

310.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

311.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

312.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

313.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

314.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

315.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

316.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

317.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

318.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

319.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

320.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

321.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

322.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion declared annullment of the lower court’s decision.

323.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

324.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

325.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

326.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

327.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

328.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

329.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

330.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

331.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

332.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

333.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

334.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

335.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

336.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

337.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

338.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern

339.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

340. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

341.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

342.   Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

343.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

344.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

345.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

346.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

347.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

348.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

349. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

350.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

351.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

352.   Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

353.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

354.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

355.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

356. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

357. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

358. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

359.   Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

360.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

361.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

362.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

363.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

364.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

365.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

366.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

367.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

368.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

369.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

370.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

371.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

372.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

373.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

374.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

375.   Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

376.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

377.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

378.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal. Reporting Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

379.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

380.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

381.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

382.   Votaram os Srs. Desembargadores Liliane Roriz, Maria Helena Cisne, Abel Gomes, Messod Azulay Neto and André Fontes.

383.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

384.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

385.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

386.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

387.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

388.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

389.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

390.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

391.   Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

392.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

393.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

394.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

395.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

396.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

397.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

398.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

399.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

400.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

401.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

402.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

403.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

404.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

405.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

406.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

407.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appellant’s appeal and accepted the Federal Government’s appeal.

408.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal. Appellate Judge André Fontes’ opinion did not request enforcement of TRIPS, however it was a dissenting opinion.

409.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

410.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

411.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

412.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

413.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

414.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

415.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

416.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

417.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

418.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

419.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

420.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

421.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

422.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

423.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

424.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

425.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

426.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

427.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

428.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

429.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

430.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

431.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

432.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

433.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

434.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion voided the decision and, in respect of the merits, it accepted the appellant’s appeal and rejected the National Treasury’s appeal.

435.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

436.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

437.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion declared the Statute.

438.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeals.

439.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion requested annulment of the decision.

440.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

441.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

442.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

443.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

444.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

445.   The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

446.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

447.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

448.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

449.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

450.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

451.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

452.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

453.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

454.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

455.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

456.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

457.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

458.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

459.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

460.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion dismissed the case without prejudice.

461.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

462.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

463.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

464. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

465.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

466.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

467.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

468. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

469.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

470. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

471.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion declared insufficiency of the claim due to SUNAMAM’s lack of standing to be sued.

472.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

473. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

474. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

475. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion seeks reversion of decision so insufficienty of claim is declared.

476. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion seeks reversion of decision so insufficienty of claim is declared.

477. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion seeks reversion of decision so insufficienty of claim is declared.

478. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion seeks reversion of decision so insufficienty of claim is declared.

479. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

480. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

481. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

482. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

483. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

484. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

485. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

486. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

487. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

488. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

489. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

490. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

491. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

492. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

493. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

494. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

495. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

496. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

497. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

498. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

499. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

500. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

501. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

502. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

503. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

504. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

505. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

506. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

507. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

508. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

509. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion dismissed the case without prejudice.

510. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

511. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

512. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

513.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

514.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

515.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

516.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

517.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

518.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

519.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

520.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

521. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

522. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

523. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

524. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

525. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

526. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion dismissed the case without prejudice.

527. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

528. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

529. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

530. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

531. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

532. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

533. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

534. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

535. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

536. The Prosecutor’ Office opinion declared annulment of the decision so it is declared that the appointed authority lacks standing to be sued.

537. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

538. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

539. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion seeks reversion of decision so insufficienty of claim is declared due to legal impossibility of the requested against the representative of late SUNAMAM.

540. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

541. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

542. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

543. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion opinion seeks reversion of decision so insufficienty of claim due to lack of standing to be sued.

544. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

545. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

546. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

547. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

548. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

549. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal, so insufficiency of claim is declared.

550. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

551. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

552. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

553. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

554. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

555. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

556. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

557. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

558. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

559. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

560. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

561. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

562. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

563. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

564. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

565. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not acknowledge the appeal.

566. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

567. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

568. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

569. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

570. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

571. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

572. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

573. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

574. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

575. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

576. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

577. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

578. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

579. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

580. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion declared article 7, line I of Statute 10,865/04 is partially unconstitutional.

581. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

582. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

583. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

584. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

585. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

586. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

587. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

588. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

589. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

590. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

591. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the plaintiff’s appeal and partially accepted the appeal of the Federal Government to acknowledge extinguishment of the action.

592. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

593. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

594. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

595. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

596. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

597. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

598. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

599. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

600. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

601. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

602. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

603. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

604. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

605. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

606. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

607. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

608. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

609. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

610. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

611. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

612. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

613. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

614. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

615. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

616. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

617. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

618. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

619. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

620. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

621. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the defendant’s appeal and accepted the ministry’s appeal.

622. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

623.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

624.  The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

625. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

626. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

627. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the National Treasury.

628. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

629. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

630. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not acknowledge the appeal retained and rejected the appeals.

631. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

632. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

633. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

634. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

635. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

636. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

637. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

638. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

639. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

640. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

641. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

642. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

643. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

644. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

645. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

646. Votaram os Srs. Desembargadores Néfi Cordeiro, Márcio Antônio Rocha, Tadaaqui Hirose, Artur César De Souza and Paulo Afonso Brum Vaz, Luiz Fernando Wowk Penteado.

647. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

648. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

649. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings until a decision on RE 559.607/SC is made.

650. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

651. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings until a decision on RE 559.607/SC is made.

652. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

653. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings until a decision on RE 559.607/SC is made.

654. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

655. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

656. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

657. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the defendant’s appeal.

658. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

659. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal

660. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

661. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

662. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

663. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

664. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the Treasury’s appeal and rejected the appellant’s appeal.

665. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

666. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

667. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

668. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the prosecution’s appeal and reject the attorney’s appeal.

669. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

670. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal

671. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

672. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

673. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

674. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

675. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

676. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

677. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

678. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

679. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal. da impetrante and não dar provimento ao recurso of the Federal Government.

680. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

681. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

682. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

683. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

684. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

685. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

686. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

687. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal

688. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

689. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

690. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

691. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal

692. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

693. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

694. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

695. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

696. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

697. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

698. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

699. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

700. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

701. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

702. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

703. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

704. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

705. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appellant’s appeal and rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

706. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

707. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

708. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

709. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

710. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings due to RE 559.607/SC.

711. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

712. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

713. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

714. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

715. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion granted the certainty.

716. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

717. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

718. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion affirmed the customs fee charges and rejected additionals from article 7, line I of the Statute #10,835/04.

719. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

720. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

721. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

722. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

723. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the Appellate Court’s authority. Appeal is to be accepted otherwise.

724. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

725. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

726. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

727. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

728. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

729. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

730. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

731. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

732. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

733. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

734. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

735. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

736. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

737. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

738. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings until a decision on RE 559.607/SC is made.

739. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

740. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

741. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion did not acknowledge the appeal retained and rejected the appeal.

742. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

743. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

744. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

745. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

746. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the prosecution’s appeal and reject the attorney’s appeal.

747. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

748. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

749. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

750. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

751. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

752. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

753. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

754. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

755. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

756. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

757. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

758. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

759. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

760. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

761. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

762. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

763. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

764. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

765. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

766. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

767. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

768. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

769. The Prosecutor Office’s opinion stayed the proceedings due to RE 559.607/SC.

770. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

771. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

772. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

773. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

774. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings until decision on RE # 559.607/SC.

775. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

776. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

777. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

778. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

779. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

780. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings.

781. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

782. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

783. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

784. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

785. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

786. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

787. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

788. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

789. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

790. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

791. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

792. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

793. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government and partially accept the Appellant’s appeal, and reject the part acknowledged.

794. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion stayed the proceedings due to the general repercusion acknowledged.

795. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

796. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

797. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

798. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

799. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

800. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

801. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

802. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

803. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

804. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

805. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

806. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal of the Federal Government.

807. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

808. Opionion given by Appellate Judges Paulo Afonso Brum Vaz, Luiz Fernando Wowk Penteado, João Batista Pinto Silveira, Celso Kipper, Otávio Roberto Pamplona, Alvaro Eduardo Junqueira, Luís Alberto D Azevedo Aurvalle, Joel Ilan Paciornik, Rômulo Pizzolatti, Ricardo Teixeira Do Valle Pereira, Maria Lúcia Luz Leiria, Maria De Fátima F. Labarrère, Luiz Carlos De Castro Lugon and Tadaaqui Hirose.

809. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

810. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

811. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

812. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

813. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

814. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

815. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

816. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

817. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

818. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

819. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

820. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

821. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

822. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

823. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

824. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

825. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

826. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion partially accepted the appeal.

827. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

828. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

829. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion accepted the appeal.

830. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion claimed this matter is not of its concern.

831. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

832. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

833. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

834. The Prosecutor’s Office opinion rejected the appeal.

835.  Opinion given my Federal Appellate JudgesUbaldo Ataíde Cavalcante, Augustino Chaves and Francisco Wildo.

836.  Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges Paulo Roberto de Oliveira Lima, Napoleão Maia Filho and Petrucio Ferreira.

837.  Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges Geraldo Apoliano, Paulo Roberto de Oliveira Lima and Vladimir Carvalho.

838.  Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges José Maria Lucena, Francisco Cavalcanti and Rogério Fialho Moreira.

839.  Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges José Maria Lucena, Francisco Cavalcanti and Manoel Erhardt.

840.  Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges José Maria Lucena, Francisco Cavalcanti and Manoel Erhardt.

841. Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges José Maria Lucena, Francisco Cavalcanti and Manoel Erhardt.

842. Opinion given my Federal Appellate Judges Lazaro Guimarães, Margarida Cantarelli and Edílson Nobre.

End Note