Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
0 comments 
5th Panel Decision of TRT-MG Confirms Indemnity of R$ 5,000 and Reimbursement of Amounts After Improper Retention by Ex-Employee.
Normally, it is workers who take labor justice action against their employers. However, in a recent ruling by the 5th Panel of the Regional Labor Court of Minas Gerais (TRT-MG), the opposite occurred: the ex-employer took a former employee to court.
The company, which operates in the event planning and party sector, accused the ex-employee of causing material and moral damages after the end of the contract. The request for indemnity was accepted, and the conviction was upheld on appeal.
Conduct After Contract Termination
According to the records, it was proven that after leaving the job, the ex-employee continued to keep in contact with clients and received amounts in the company’s name.
-
Pickle juice, molasses, and brewery waste are spread by trucks on frozen roads in Massachusetts to melt ice after a shortage of road salt, repurpose industrial waste, and reduce damage to rivers and lakes used as sources of drinking water.
-
Government makes the decision and offers free “cinema” with 500 Brazilian productions for everyone to watch without a subscription.
-
Abdominal seems simple, but it hides a secret that can change your workout: the exercise strengthens the core, improves posture, and can even prevent injuries when done correctly.
-
Mount Everest is the highest mountain above sea level, but it is not the point on Earth closest to space, because the bulge of the planet at the Equator makes the Chimborazo volcano in Ecuador about 2 kilometers farther from the center of the Earth even though it is much lower.
He claimed that there was an agreement for the transfer of funds or that it was payment for commissions, but he did not provide evidence.
On the contrary, police reports and testimonies confirmed that clients paid him directly and later discovered that he no longer worked for the company.
An electronic message attached to the case reinforced this conclusion.
They showed the ex-employee waiting for payments and mentioning a fictitious service contract in the company’s name, which undermined client trust and the organization’s credibility.
Relator’s Understanding
The relator of the appeal highlighted that case law recognizes the possibility of legal entities suffering moral damages, provided they are proven.
For him, the former employee’s conduct had a direct impact on the company’s image, creating the risk of “incalculable negative publicity” through available media and communication channels.
In the judge’s assessment, such a situation undermines public trust and can raise doubts about the organization’s integrity, affecting its market position and even its future relationships.
Defense Arguments Rejected
The ex-employee tried to argue that the action was retaliatory since he had previously filed a labor complaint against the company.
However, the relator did not accept this argument. According to the ruling, the moral compensation requested observed the statute of limitations provided in Article 7, Item XXIX, of the Constitution.
Thus, even if the matter could have been discussed in the previous labor action, there is no legal impediment for its examination in a specific process.
Vidigal emphasized that the retention of funds, admitted by the defendant himself in court, made the damages caused to the company indisputable, reinforcing the relevance of the conviction.
Value of Indemnity and Reimbursement
Based on the documentary evidence, the panel upheld the conviction for moral damages in the amount of R$ 5,000.
The relator stressed that there was no evidence of the return of the amounts received by the ex-employee.
The calculation of the amounts to be reimbursed will be carried out in the liquidation phase, as provided in Article 879 of the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT) and Article 509 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
The decision highlighted that this is not a conviction based on assumptions, but on concrete evidence presented in the records.
Unanimously, the 5th Panel of TRT of Minas Gerais followed the relator’s vote and denied the appeal of the ex-employee, consolidating the conviction.
-
-
-
-
-
-
46 people reacted to this.