The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) annulled the judgment of an appeal by the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro (TJ-RJ) that had ordered Petrobras to pay roughly R$ 4.5 billion in compensation to a Dutch company, holding that the second-instance decision was procedurally flawed due to irregularities in the composition of the panel that decided the case.
The dispute stems from charter contracts for drillships used in oil exploration, which provided for scheduled technical stoppages to upgrade the vessels, with a temporary suspension of the contractual term estimated at about 150 days. During performance, however, these stoppages extended far beyond what had been foreseen, surpassing 600 days for one ship and more than 500 days for the other.
The contractor argued that by disregarding the entire additional downtime as a suspension period, Petrobras ended the contracts earlier than it should have, reducing the number of paid days and causing significant losses; based on this interpretation, the TJ-RJ had recognized the right to damages and set compensation at a level that, once updated, reached billions of reais.
On review, the STJ’s 3rd Panel concluded by majority that the state court failed to follow the procedural rules applicable to the “expanded appellate judgment” mechanism under article 942 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and also violated internal regimental rules, which undermined the validity of the ruling.
As a result, the condemnation was set aside and the case was sent back to the TJ-RJ for a new appellate judgment with a properly formed panel and correct procedure.
The STJ decision does not address the merits of the contractual controversy at this stage, but it reopens the debate in the second instance and suspends the effects of the previous award, placing back under discussion the length of the technical stoppages, the method for counting contractual time, and any eventual responsibility for the financial losses claimed by the supplier.
Photo: Canva
