Post by messi05 on Jan 22, 2024 4:27:37 GMT
Urgent maintenance on the aircraft constitutes an internal fortuitous event, so that the unsatisfactory assistance provided by the defendant in relation to the author entails the duty to compensate”, considered the rapporteur of the case, judge Sebastião de Moraes Filho. The judge mentioned article 737 of the Civil Code to formulate his decision, the content of which establishes that: “The carrier is subject to the scheduled schedules and itineraries, under penalty of being liable for losses and damages, except for reasons of force majeure”.
The appeal also requested a reduction in the Buy Phone Number List compensation amount, which was complied with by the rapporteur, reducing the compensation from R$15,000 set by the floor judge to R$8,000. With information from the TJ-MT Press Office.Considering that there was discrimination and failure to provide services, the Federal District Court ordered two vehicle dealers and the automaker to compensate a disabled young man with R$30,000 for the delay in the delivery of a vehicle purchased by his father. The car was purchased tax-free, due to the minor's proven special needs. However, six months after the deal was made, the car was not delivered.
As he could no longer wait, the author's father waived the exemption and the car was promptly delivered. Faced with this situation, the boy filed a compensation action asking that the dealer and the manufacturer be condemned for discrimination. In its defense, the reseller pointed out that another company was responsible for the sale, which is why it requested its inclusion in the process. The latter, in turn, claimed that it was not responsible for the delay and that it had not practiced any type of discrimination. The automaker, despite being cited, did not present a defense.
The appeal also requested a reduction in the Buy Phone Number List compensation amount, which was complied with by the rapporteur, reducing the compensation from R$15,000 set by the floor judge to R$8,000. With information from the TJ-MT Press Office.Considering that there was discrimination and failure to provide services, the Federal District Court ordered two vehicle dealers and the automaker to compensate a disabled young man with R$30,000 for the delay in the delivery of a vehicle purchased by his father. The car was purchased tax-free, due to the minor's proven special needs. However, six months after the deal was made, the car was not delivered.
As he could no longer wait, the author's father waived the exemption and the car was promptly delivered. Faced with this situation, the boy filed a compensation action asking that the dealer and the manufacturer be condemned for discrimination. In its defense, the reseller pointed out that another company was responsible for the sale, which is why it requested its inclusion in the process. The latter, in turn, claimed that it was not responsible for the delay and that it had not practiced any type of discrimination. The automaker, despite being cited, did not present a defense.