Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
5 min of reading 
36 comments 
A Neighborhood Dispute at Lagoa Rodrigo de Freitas, Initiated Over 40 Years Ago, Resulted in a Million-Dollar Fine Following Repeated Noncompliance with Court Orders to Trim Trees at the Boundary of Two Properties.
The decision of the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice that upheld the fine of R$ 10 million imposed on heirs who, for decades, failed to comply with court orders to trim trees at the boundary of two properties facing Lagoa Rodrigo de Freitas in the South Zone of Rio remains valid.
The panel determined that the amount is not the result of excess from the Judiciary but of the prolonged noncompliance with the order.
The rapporteur was Minister Nancy Andrighi, who pointed out the lack of space for new reduction when the debtor’s own conduct causes the fine to grow over time.
-
100 Italian chefs gathered in Chelsea and created the world’s largest tiramisu, measuring 440.6 meters, using 3,000 eggs, 400 kilograms of sugar, and 50,000 ladyfingers, surpassing the previous record of 273.5 meters and putting chef Mirko Ricci back at the top of Guinness with a giant-scale dessert.
-
You might be closer to radiation than you imagine: 7 locations in Brazil contain cesium-137 waste, uranium mining, nuclear plants, and even naturally radioactive beaches
-
The National Capital of Capim-Dourado surprises by transforming a city of 2,700 inhabitants in Jalapão into a livestock powerhouse, with drought-resistant grass, low cost, and a direct impact on one of Brazil’s largest herds.
-
Brazilian city installs machines that transform recyclables into money with PIX withdrawal, and planned expansion with more mobile units in strategic areas.
In her vote, the minister noted that the exorbitance arises from negligence and reaffirmed the coercive function of the astreintes.
This position was victorious.
There was an attempt to modify the outcome.
Minister Moura Ribeiro opened a divergence to lower the amount to R$ 500 thousand, citing supposed disproportion between the trimming obligation and the accumulated figure.
The proposal, however, was defeated, and the maintenance of the amount set by the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro (TJ-RJ) prevailed.
In a video of the session, the minister presents his reasoning.
What Did the STJ Decide
The court confirmed that daily fines serve to compel compliance with court orders and not to substitute the obligation.
When resistance and delay persist, the account grows precisely because of the debtor’s inertia, and not due to punitive initiative from the Judiciary.
The 3rd Panel, by majority, followed the rapporteur to maintain the executable total at R$ 10 million, as had been decided by the TJ-RJ, which had reduced the original amount of over R$ 20 million.
Furthermore, the decision reinforced a well-established understanding in the court: astreintes are a legitimate coercive instrument to ensure the effectiveness of the ruling.
In recent judgments, the STJ has reiterated that the triggering event for the fine is noncompliance with the court order, applying as long as resistance persists, always with guidelines of reasonableness.
Timeline of the Dispute at Lagoa
The litigation began in 1983, when the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit to enforce the trimming of trees that, according to the complaint, blocked light, ventilation, and the view of the lagoon.
In 1985, the parties reached an agreement stipulating that the crowns of the trees would be maintained at a height of two meters, with periodic maintenance the responsibility of the defendants.
The agreement did not halt the conflict.
Over the following years, the property owners repeatedly failed to comply with court orders, which led to the imposition of a daily fine of R$ 10 thousand.
With the prolonged noncompliance, the accumulated figure surpassed R$ 20 million by the time of execution.
In an interlocutory decision, the TJ-RJ limited the executable amount to R$ 10 million, without removing the penalty as a coercive mechanism.
In October of 2024, the 3rd Panel of the STJ upheld the solution.
What Are the Legal Rules that Support the Case
The core of the controversy is neighborhood law.
The Civil Code, in its article 1,283, authorizes the owner of the invaded land to cut roots and branches that exceed the dividing line, up to the vertical plane of the boundary between the properties.
It is precisely this provision that provides material support for the obligation to keep the crown contained when it exceeds the boundary.
In civil procedure, the specific execution of obligations to do or not do is regulated by arts. 536 and 537 of the CPC.
The first organizes means of enforcement and support measures.
The second regulates the conditional fine (astreintes), which can be set and adjusted by the judge to ensure the order, as long as it is sufficient and commensurate with the obligation.
These foundations support the adoption and maintenance of the daily fine in the Lagoa case.
Why Did the Fine Reach R$ 10 Million
The figure resulted from the sum of a daily fine set at R$ 10 thousand over years of resistance.
In her vote, the rapporteur highlighted that the debtor’s own inertia led to the increase, dismissing the disproportion argument when the amount reflects the extent of noncompliance.
The majority of the panel understood that, in such cases, reduction could compromise the coercive purpose and reward the delay.
Conversely, the dissenting vote argued that the judge should have prioritized other executive measures to enforce the trimming, and that the monetary sanction alone proved ineffective in compelling compliance.
The divergence, however, did not prevail.
What Does This Decision Signal for Similar Cases
The message is clear: failing to comply with a court order is costly.
By reaffirming the legitimacy of high astreintes when there is prolonged resistance, the STJ seeks to discourage procedural recalcitrance and protect the effectiveness of rulings.
For those facing similar situations, two fronts are essential.
On one hand, the aggrieved party must formalize notifications, gather evidence, and request proportional coercive measures, including daily fines.
On the other hand, the party responsible for containing the crown needs to promptly fulfill the obligation and, when necessary, seek prior environmental authorization, depending on the type and applicable municipal legislation, to avoid cumulative administrative sanctions.
Good practices mitigate conflict and reduce the risk of million-dollar liabilities.
Voices from the Legal Community
In an article published after the judgment, attorney Daniel Hidalgo noted that when the debtor challenges the decisions for years, there is no disproportionality in maintaining the fine that reflects their own resistance.
This reading reinforces the guideline set by the 3rd Panel and helps clarify the role of astreintes as a tool for procedural coercion, not for enrichment.
And Now?
More than forty years after the start of the demand, the case remains a reference for neighborhood litigation that has become costly due to a simple obligation to keep the trees trimmed.
In September 2025, the decision of the 3rd Panel remains intact and instructive for those dealing with disputes involving branches and roots encroaching on neighboring property, especially in densely urban areas like Lagoa Rodrigo de Freitas.
How far is a neighbor willing to go — and pay — to ignore a trimming order that could have been complied with using a pair of shears and a maintenance calendar?
A pessoa ou pessoas já demonstraram total desrespeito com vizinhos e o judiciario, portanto deveriam sofrer uma punição na base da função social do imóvel desvirtuada dos fins sociais que se supõe ter consubstanciado pela sua localização em comunidade.
Tem que se aplicar a multa sim, primeiro por descumprimento da ordem judicial e também indenizar o vizinho pq os problemas causados são inúmeros com a agravante do dono da árvore ter conhecimento e nada fazer…muitas vezes é proposital.
E eu planejando plantar uma árvore frutífera nos fundos do meu lote, agora tenho que ter cuidado na distância para não invadir o lote vizinho com a copa dela.