Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
3 min of reading 
9 comments 
The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) unanimously defined that, even when included in an inventory, the family property remains unattachable, reinforcing the protection of housing in cases of judicial execution; according to the Legal Advisor, the decision recognizes that the asset preserves its nature as a residence, regardless of the inheritance share.
The inventory is one of the most delicate moments in succession processes, especially when it involves debts left by the deceased. In a recent decision, the STJ ruled that the family property, even if included in an inventory, cannot be attached for debt payment, preserving the right to housing for the heirs.
According to information from the Legal Advisor, the case analyzed involved a tax execution by the government of Rio Grande do Sul against a couple who had already passed away. The daughter, who resided in the property and cared for her parents until their death, contested the attachment and won in the superior court, which recognized the unattachability of the property.
The Case That Reached The STJ
The dispute began after the death of a couple, when the family property was included in the inventory and targeted for attachment due to tax execution.
-
The Senate approves a bill that criminalizes misogyny, hatred, or aversion towards women, and includes the crime in the Racism Law with a penalty of up to 5 years.
-
Chamber Approves Bill That Allows Pepper Spray for Women Over 16 and Imposes Strict Rules for Purchase, Possession, and Use as Self-Defense
-
Chamber Approves Law to Combat Leucaena, Fast-Growing Plant That Dominates Land and Threatens Native Species in Various Regions of the Country
-
Asset Division: Know What Cannot Be Divided in Case of Divorce
The Court of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul had decided that, because it belonged to the estate, the protection against attachment could only be argued after the division among the heirs.
However, the couple’s daughter argued that the asset already had the nature of a family residence, used by her and her family, which would justify the immediate application of the protection provided in the Family Asset Law.
The STJ accepted this argument and recognized the priority of the right to housing over debts.
The Justification of The Ministers
The rapporteur of the special appeal, Minister Benedito Gonçalves, emphasized that the unattachability is not lost simply because the property is included in an inventory.
He noted that the court’s jurisprudence had already recognized this protection and that the decision of the TJ-RS had ignored the evidence regarding the residential use of the property.
For the ministers, the principle of the dignity of the human person must prevail.
If the property is used as a residence, the legal protection remains, regardless of the stage of the succession process.
The Reach Of The Decision
The unanimous decision of the STJ strengthens legal certainty in similar situations.
For lawyers specializing in successions, the understanding settles a question that had been the subject of controversy: the application of protection to the family asset even before the conclusion of the division.
The decision reinforces that tax executions, even when initiated by the public authority, cannot disregard the essential nature of the family property.
The rule applies to both private debts and tax debts, provided that residential use is proven.
Impacts For Families and Heirs
In practice, the ruling ensures that heirs who already use the property as a residence are not left unprotected during the inventory.
This means that protection against attachment can be invoked immediately, preventing families from being evicted due to debts still under discussion.
According to the Legal Advisor, the decision also has a pedagogical impact: it reinforces the idea that family assets intended for housing occupy a special position in the legal system and should not be sacrificed before exhausting other collection alternatives.
The understanding established by the STJ shows that, even in inventory processes, housing remains an absolute priority.
The family property maintains its unattachability, protecting heirs and reaffirming the importance of the dignity of the human person in the face of debts.
And you? Do you think it is fair to provide automatic protection for family property during the inventory, or do you consider that this hampers the settlement of inherited debts? Share your opinion in the comments — your experience can enrich the legal debate.
Acho justo, o esforço de um chefe de família honesto deve ser protegido. Na maioria das vezes as dividas foram contraídas contra a vontade do devedor que ficou impossibilitado de arcar com o compromisso pela dificuldade da vida, após negócios mal feitos e muita da vezes iludidos por terceiros, perderam sua condição por perder suas economias e lutou e passa na maioria das vezes por sérias dificuldades para manter o único patrimônio que restou.
Justo! Acho que poderia fazer melhor.
Isentar as dívidas do morto, porque morto não paga dívidas.
E após a morte do proprietário, fazer a transferência para os herdeiros. Para que eles possam pagar os impostos. Que é importante para o estado!
Pois isso daria plenos poderes para os herdeiros, vender, morar ou alugar….
Se forem de menor, transferência também em nome do menor com responsabilidade impostos com responsável que tiver a tutela.
Com possibilidade de isenção também dependendo das condições…. Claro!
O estado não tem que colocar como obrigação a fazer inventário e partilha.
Essa decisão cabe aos herdeiros e não ao estado.
Ao estado cabe os impostos!
Casa um no seu lugar!
Essa lei de inventário, acho um grande prejuízo financeiro para as pessoas e também uma pressão psicológica familiar, para o livre arbítrio, o direito de ir e vir, a liberdade para morar no que é seu por direito.
Isso também não combina quanto aos direitos humanos….
O sonho de todos os pais é deixar uma casa para os seus filhos….
Além de pagar, IPTU, AGUA, LUZ, ETC:
Ainda tem uma multa porque vc não fez inventário , de sua casa, que foi paga com o dinheiro do suor do trabalho de uma vida pelos os pais….😔
E se as pessoas não quiserem vender?
Ficara em dívida com o estado porque não vendeu o que é de seu por direito?Esta decisão não cabe aos herdeiros e não ao estado.⚖️
Que isso!?🤷🏼
Eu acho que desde quando os pais que tem dividas penhoradas morre ;a dívida deixa de existir.
Desde que não seja vc quem eles devem né?
Nem tudo é tão simples.