Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
6 min of reading 
13 comments 
In Unanimous Decision On Thursday, December 4, 2025, The STJ Established Thesis On Unusual Measures In Debt Enforcement, Allowing Suspension Of Passport, Driver’s License, And Credit Cards Of Resistant Debtor, As Long As Traditional Collection Methods Have Been Exhausted And The Principles Of Contradictory, Proportionality, And Specific Justification Are Respected In Each Concrete Case Analyzed.
During a session held on the afternoon of this Thursday, December 4, 2025, the 2nd Section of the STJ confirmed that judges can adopt unusual measures to enforce debt payment, such as suspending passports, driver’s licenses, and credit cards, provided strict criteria are observed. The decision was made during the judgment of Theme 1,137, under the Civil Procedure Code, and consolidates the understanding regarding the use of these tools in civil executions.
In the same judgment, the college established a thesis determining that these measures can only be used in a subsidiary and exceptional manner, after traditional collection means have been exhausted, with a decision grounded in the specificities of the case, respecting the contradictory principle, proportionality, reasonableness, and the least possible burden on the debtor, reinforcing the effectiveness of debt enforcement.
What Changes In Debt Enforcement With The STJ Decision
In practice, the STJ confirmed that the judge can resort to unusual executive measures to try to compel the debtor to comply with the judicial decision.
-
The noise law will no longer be in effect at 10 PM starting in June with a new rule valid during the 2026 World Cup.
-
The Chamber opens a debate on driver’s licenses at 16 years old as part of a reform that includes around 270 proposals to change the Brazilian Traffic Code and may redesign rules for licensing, enforcement, and circulation in the country.
-
The new Civil Code could revolutionize marriages in Brazil with “express divorce” and changes that could exclude spouses from inheritance.
-
Banco do Brasil sues famous influencer for million-dollar debt and intensifies debate on delinquency, risks of seizure, and direct impact on Gkay’s credibility.
Among these measures are the suspension of passports, national driver’s licenses, and the blocking of credit cards, always tied to the debt collection in the civil execution process.
The court emphasized that these measures are an expression of the so-called general enforcement power provided in the Civil Procedure Code, used precisely when traditional means, such as seizure of assets and account blocking, prove insufficient.
The central message is that the Judiciary can be firmer with those who unjustifiably resist paying debts recognized in court, as long as all procedural guarantees are respected.
Criteria To Suspend Passport, Driver’s License And Debtor’s Credit Cards
According to the established thesis, the judge can only impose such restrictions after exhausting typical collection alternatives, such as asset searches and attempts at seizure, or when there is clear and unjustified resistance from the debtor in fulfilling the obligation.
This is not an automatic punishment for all debts, but a pointed response in executions that do not progress.
The decision must be clearly justified, explaining why a particular measure, such as suspending a passport or driver’s license, is appropriate in that specific case and how it helps to make debt collection effective.
The STJ also reinforced that the contradictory principle, proportionality, and reasonableness must be observed, including regarding the duration of restrictions, to avoid indefinite or excessive measures.
Cases That Originated The Thesis On Debt Enforcement
The topic reached the STJ through two repetitive appeals. In one of them, a bank challenged a decision from the Court of Justice of São Paulo that had blocked the suspension of the passport and driver’s license of a debtor in debt execution proceedings, considering these measures disproportionate, and only allowed the blocking of credit cards not linked to food purchases.
The rapporteur, Minister Marco Buzzi, understood that the decision of the São Paulo court used a generic justification that would, in practice, render the very instrument provided in the Civil Procedure Code unfeasible.
As a result, the STJ determined that the state court should redo the judgment, now following the parameters established for the use of unusual measures in debt collection.
In the other appeal, the STJ maintained the blocking of credit cards, except for those used for food purchases, as there was no appeal from the debtor.
What Experts And Organizations Said About Debt Collection
During the judgment, different entities participated as amici curiae and presented complementary views.
Representing the Brazilian Institute of Procedural Law, lawyer Clarice Frechiani Lara Leite warned of the risk of an overly broad thesis on unusual measures, especially when there is no concrete demonstration of asset concealment or a clear relationship between the chosen measure and the behavior of the debtor.
She argued that these restrictions require real contradictory, proportionality, specific justification, and defined deadlines, to prevent indefinite limitations detached from the economic reality of the debtor. The idea is to allow the thesis to guide the future of the matter without rigidifying the case-by-case analysis, which is crucial when it comes to limiting rights in the name of debt collection.
On behalf of Febraban, attorney Anselmo Moreira Gonzalez argued that the unusual measures provided for in Article 139, Section IV, of the CPC are constitutional and legitimate to ensure the effectiveness of the process when traditional mechanisms fail.
He emphasized that the debate is not about denying fundamental rights but about making Civil Procedure more effective in debt collection, in line with previous decisions of the STJ itself.
In the same vein, attorney Ana Carolina Andrada Arraias Caputo Bastos, representing the Permanent Forum of Civil Proceduralists, claimed that these measures are essential when the debtor deliberately prevents compliance with the sentence.
According to her, the judge can even adopt them ex officio, as long as proportionality, reasonableness, and contradictory principles are respected, to ensure the authority of the judicial decisions related to debt.
Specific Divergence On Indications Of Debtor’s Asset
At the moment of finalizing the thesis drafting, a point of debate arose regarding the requirement for indications of expropriable assets of the debtor. The rapporteur initially proposed this condition, but the passage was eventually removed after a suggestion from Minister Nancy Andrighi.
Minister Isabel Gallotti was the only one to advocate for the explicit maintenance of the requirement, arguing that it would serve as an important safeguard to prevent harsh measures from affecting those who truly cannot pay the debt, preserving the coercive, rather than punitive, nature of these tools. For her, care is needed not to transform debt enforcement into mere personal punishment.
However, Ministers Marco Buzzi and Raul Araújo understood that requiring prior indications of assets could undermine the effectiveness of unusual measures, especially in situations where the debtor conceals assets or adopts strategies to frustrate debt enforcement.
According to this view, the CPC authorizes the judge to seek the effectiveness of the process even without clear initial indications of available assets, provided the other criteria of proportionality and subsidiarity are strictly respected.
Impact Of The Decision On Those With Debt In Civil Execution
With the approved thesis, the message from the STJ is that the Judiciary is more willing to use strong instruments to unlock executions that do not progress, especially in cases of unjustified resistance to debt payment.
This does not mean automating the suspension of passports, driver’s licenses, or cards, but allowing these measures to come into play when all traditional attempts have been tested.
At the same time, the court reaffirmed that the use of these restrictions must be justified, temporary, and proportional, always linked to a concrete purpose of making debt collection effective. Thus, the decision seeks to balance the right of the creditor to receive with the minimum protection of the debtor, who cannot be subjected to arbitrary or eternal limitations.
And you, do you think it is fair for the judge to suspend passports, driver’s licenses, and cards to pressure debt payment, or do you believe this type of measure goes beyond the limit and punishes the debtor too much?
Punição ao devevor, é um completo absurdo, nosso judiciário agora também legisla, isso vai realmente punir grandes empresários? Vocês acreditam que realmente grandes devedores ficam andando de carro? Ou quando precisam utilizam seus motoristas, querem punir quem não tem condição de pagar, e não realmente quem realmente não quer pagar, Brasil uma grande piada juridica.
Absurdo e um idoso o que vai fazer se matar? Cadê nosso presidente ??
Isso é uma vergonha e mais uma vez o judiciário impondo sua lei, criando lei, com certeza a maior parte dos devedores não queriam estar nesta situação que causa vários problemas pessoais, principalmente emocionais. Além de mais uma forma de ameaça que vai ser usada pelos credores, é uma vergonha esta imposição sem uma lei concreta.