Post by account_disabled on Mar 13, 2024 4:15:09 GMT -5
The reforming constituent understood therefore that the platform for dialogue between the states DF and municipality aiming to coordinate the respective competencies in administrative management collection and judicial representation of IBS. It is natural that the complementary law cannot change the structure constitutionally provided for in the articles. XXII and of the CF. It is emblematic however that the Constitution now provides for the possibility of delegation and sharing via the management committee of such competencies.
And this draws attention to a little-known institute which could revolutionize the collection and judicial representation in fiscal matters of states the Federal District and municipalities provided for in article ° of the CPC. This is a typical hypothesis of procedural legal business of the institutional protocol type . See if:
Art. The States and the Federal District CG Leads may establish a reciprocal commitment for the practice of a procedural act by their attorneys in favor of another federated entity through an agreement signed by the respective attorneys' offices.
Article ° had its constitutionality questioned before the STF. The Court understood that the provision is constitutional . We are therefore faced with a legitimate instrument that if effectively implemented could revolutionize the way in which tax credits are managed with judicial representation bodies after the effective implementation of IBS.
From this provision it is now possible for state and DF prosecutors to enter into agreements to carry out procedural acts in other StatesDF in favor of another federated entity. If there is an agreement signed between the respective prosecutor's offices it becomes possible for for example a DF prosecutor to act on behalf of the State of Pernambuco in a process that takes place before the DF Court and that Pernambuco is a party.
Although the text of article ° provides for the convention to be held only between the States and the Federal District the doctrine already has a clear position that it is an instrument that can also be extended to Municipalities that have regularly installed attorney's offices. See statement No. of the III Civil Procedural Law Conference of the CJF: “Paragraph of art. of the CPC to municipalities that have a regularly constituted prosecutor”.
And this draws attention to a little-known institute which could revolutionize the collection and judicial representation in fiscal matters of states the Federal District and municipalities provided for in article ° of the CPC. This is a typical hypothesis of procedural legal business of the institutional protocol type . See if:
Art. The States and the Federal District CG Leads may establish a reciprocal commitment for the practice of a procedural act by their attorneys in favor of another federated entity through an agreement signed by the respective attorneys' offices.
Article ° had its constitutionality questioned before the STF. The Court understood that the provision is constitutional . We are therefore faced with a legitimate instrument that if effectively implemented could revolutionize the way in which tax credits are managed with judicial representation bodies after the effective implementation of IBS.
From this provision it is now possible for state and DF prosecutors to enter into agreements to carry out procedural acts in other StatesDF in favor of another federated entity. If there is an agreement signed between the respective prosecutor's offices it becomes possible for for example a DF prosecutor to act on behalf of the State of Pernambuco in a process that takes place before the DF Court and that Pernambuco is a party.
Although the text of article ° provides for the convention to be held only between the States and the Federal District the doctrine already has a clear position that it is an instrument that can also be extended to Municipalities that have regularly installed attorney's offices. See statement No. of the III Civil Procedural Law Conference of the CJF: “Paragraph of art. of the CPC to municipalities that have a regularly constituted prosecutor”.