Commentary on Judgment No. 22267 of 06/08/2024: Mortgage Registration as an Interruption of the Statute of Limitations

Judgment No. 22267 of August 6, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, represents an important clarification on tax collection and the statute of limitations. In particular, the Court confirmed that the communication of mortgage registration, addressed to the debtor, not only informs the individual of their debt situation but also assumes the nature of a demand for payment. This aspect is fundamental to understanding the dynamics of the statute of limitations for tax claims.

Regulatory Context

The decision is based on the interpretation of Article 2943 of the Civil Code, which establishes the conditions for interrupting the statute of limitations. In summary, mortgage registration, being a formal and receivable act, leads to the interruption of the statute of limitations for tax claims, as established by the Court. Case law has already addressed similar aspects, as demonstrated by previous summaries (No. 850 of 2021 and No. 14213 of 2022), thus consolidating a clear legal orientation.

In general. Regarding tax collection, the formal communication of mortgage registration, a receivable act addressed to the debtor, also assumes the nature of a demand for payment, expressing the creditor's intention to assert their right against the liable party, and therefore constitutes, pursuant to Article 2943 of the Civil Code, an act that interrupts the statute of limitations for tax claims.

Implications of the Judgment

The judgment in question has several practical implications, including:

• Recognition of the communication of mortgage registration as an act of demand.
• Clarification on the role of the act in managing tax claims.
• Consequences on the statute of limitations for claims, which can no longer be invoked in the absence of adequate information from the creditor.

These considerations are particularly relevant for taxpayers and legal professionals, as they provide a clearer framework for the dynamics of interrupting the statute of limitations.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 22267 of 2024 offers an important opportunity for reflection on the methods of tax claim collection and defense strategies for debtors. The possibility of considering mortgage registration as an act interrupting the statute of limitations requires careful analysis by lawyers and tax advisors, in order to best protect the rights of their clients. Adequate information and awareness of one's rights are indispensable tools in an increasingly complex legal context.