Find a debt-help route outside the United States

SettleADebt C_BR PASS-14 — Brazil

Ordinary civil transaction validity, nullity and annulability gateway

Distinct reviewed component: P01 D02 only—general Civil Code capacity, object, form, manifestation defects, nullity, annulability, confirmation, decadence and partial invalidity.

Research baseline: October 22, 2026, America/Los_Angeles. Fresh source-access dates: October 26, 2026 PDT / October 27, 2026 UTC. Exact source-opening clocks: Not logged and unknown. Publication dates and review-completion timestamps are not source-opening timestamps. Status: Narrow federal civil-law gateway with all actual-contract, provider, professional, consumer, sector, procedural, territorial, foreign and country-level holds preserved.

PASS-04, PASS-05, PASS-09, PASS-10 and PASS-13 remain saved but unreviewed and are not adopted as premises. The necessary Civil Code provisions were read afresh. PASS-06 and the PASS-07/PASS-11/PASS-12 work retain only their separately stated review status and holds.

No actual person, provider, creditor, borrower, company, contract, account, property, licence, case, docket or private record was searched or classified.

Executive determination

1. A valid ordinary civil transaction requires three basic elements: a capable actor; a lawful, possible, determined or determinable object; and the form prescribed by—or not prohibited by—law. Failure of one element does not always produce the same consequence: some defects create nullity, others annulability, and some create only correction, damages or partial invalidity. C_BR-P14-C007–C012, C025–C046. Primary source: Civil Code arts. 104–107 and 166–184, https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10406compilada.htm. Planalto+2
2. **Current incapacity law must not use the pre-2015 categories.**Absolute incapacity is currently limited to persons under 16.Persons aged 16–17, habitual drunkards, persons addicted to toxic substances, persons unable temporarily or permanently to express their will, and spendthrifts are relatively incapable for specified acts or manners of acting.Disability by itself does not remove full civil capacity. C002–C006. Planalto+3
3. **Nullity and annulability are not synonyms.**A null transaction falls within the grounds in arts. 166–167; it cannot be confirmed and does not become valid merely with time.An annulable transaction remains effective until annulled by judgment, is not annulled by the court on its own motion, and may be confirmed where statutory conditions are met. C025–C046. Planalto+1
4. “Void forever” does not answer every remedial clock. Art. 169 says nullity itself does not convalidate by time. It does not, by itself, establish that every restitution, damages, accounting, possession or related claim can be brought without any time limit. Those downstream claims require their own cause of action and limitation analysis. C032, C077. Planalto
5. Simulation is nullity, not annulability. The apparent transaction is null, but a concealed transaction may survive if valid in substance and form; rights of good-faith third parties are preserved. The STJ has treated simulation as an order-of-public-policy nullity that can be recognized ex officio on a sufficient record, including in the specific third-party-objection posture it reviewed. C028–C031, C080. Planalto+1
6. The listed consent defects are ordinarily annulability grounds. Error, dolo, coercion, state of danger, lesion and fraud against creditors fall under art. 171(II), but each has distinct elements. An unfavorable bargain, pressure, inaccurate calculation or later regret does not automatically satisfy any of them. C034, C048–C074. Planalto+2
7. Error must be substantial; a calculation mistake normally permits correction only. Error must concern the transaction’s nature, its principal object or an essential quality, a materially relevant person, or a qualifying error of law. A false motive matters only if expressly made determinative. Mere arithmetic error ordinarily authorizes rectification, not annulment. C048–C052. Planalto+1
8. **Causative and incidental dolo have different effects.**If the deception caused the transaction, it may support annulment.If the transaction would still have occurred, though differently, the result is ordinarily damages rather than annulment.Third-party fraud annuls only where the beneficiary knew or should have known; otherwise the transaction can survive while the third party answers for damages. C053–C058. Planalto
9. Coercion requires more than ordinary legal pressure or respect for authority. It requires well-founded fear of imminent and considerable harm, assessed in light of the victim’s circumstances. Threatening the normal exercise of a right and mere reverential fear are expressly excluded. Third-party coercion annuls only under the statutory knowledge branch; otherwise the coercer may owe damages while the transaction survives. C059–C062. Planalto
10. Lesion requires both a subjective and objective element. There must be pressing need or inexperience plus a manifestly disproportionate exchange, evaluated at the time of contracting. No statutory percentage automatically proves lesion. Annulment should not be decreed if sufficient supplementation is offered or the favored party agrees to reduce its advantage. The STJ’s published 2019 merits summary likewise required proof of both elements rather than presuming them from a bad outcome. C064–C066. Planalto+1
11. **Confirmation requires more than continued performance alone.**Express confirmation must identify the transaction’s substance and the will to maintain it.Voluntary partial performance confirms only where the performing party knew the defect.Confirmation cannot prejudice a third party.A null transaction cannot be confirmed. C035–C039. Planalto
12. **The principal annulment periods are decadence, not extinctive prescription.**Four years from cessation of coercion.Four years from the transaction for error, dolo, fraud against creditors, state of danger or lesion.Four years from cessation of incapacity for acts of incapable persons.Two years from conclusion where another law merely says “annullable” but supplies no period. C041–C042, C075–C079. Planalto+1
13. Civil Code validity is not the whole rule for a consumer transaction. Where the CDC applies, access to terms, favorable interpretation and consumer-specific statutory nullities can independently affect the contract. PASS-14 reads only enough of the current CDC to preserve that boundary; the full fee, cancellation, unfair-term and remedy module remains deferred. C082–C084. Planalto
14. A provider’s registration or licence does not validate each transaction, and a transaction’s validity does not establish provider permission. Professional authority, financial authorization, OAB boundaries, debt-adviser status and actual contract validity remain separate questions. C085.

G1. Current Civil Code validity perimeter

G1.1 Currentness and operative-text crosswalk

No later amendment is declared absent merely because none appeared in the bounded source search. Every consequential source must be reopened at actual publication or operational use.

G1.2 Current capacity rules

Natural persons

C_BR-P14-C002 — A098. Under current Civil Code art. 3, only persons under 16 are absolutely incapable of personally exercising civil acts. Former categories tied to mental or intellectual disability were revoked by Lei 13.146/2015. Full URL: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10406compilada.htm, art. 3. Planalto

C003 — A098. Current art. 4 treats as relatively incapable, for specified acts or manners of acting:

• persons aged 16–17;
• habitual drunkards and persons addicted to toxic substances;
• persons unable, temporarily or permanently, to express their will; and
• spendthrifts.

The capacity of Indigenous persons is governed by special legislation. Same URL, art. 4. Planalto

C004 — A098. Disability itself does not affect full civil capacity. Lei 13.146 art. 6 states that disability does not affect full civil capacity, and art. 84 affirms equal exercise of legal capacity, while allowing curatorship or supported decision-making where legally applicable. Full URL: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2015/lei/l13146.htm, arts. 6 and 84. Planalto

C005 — A098. Majority begins at 18; specified emancipation events may end minority incapacity earlier under Civil Code art. 5. Civil Code URL, art. 5. Planalto

No actual person’s age, ability to express a will, curatorship, supported-decision arrangement, intoxication, dependency or prodigality is assessed here.

Juristic persons

C006 — A097. A private legal person begins legal existence with registration of its constitutive act. Its register identifies how it is administered and represented, and the legal person is bound by acts of administrators performed within their constitutive powers. Civil Code URL, arts. 45–47. Planalto

A CNPJ, company title or employee signature does not itself prove authority to enter the particular transaction. The constitutive instrument, amendments, office, delegation and transaction-specific limits remain necessary.

G1.3 Core validity elements

Civil Code art. 104 requires:

1. capable actor;
2. lawful, possible, determined or determinable object;
3. prescribed or legally permitted form.

C007–C012. Full URL: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10406compilada.htm, arts. 104–109. Planalto+1

Relative incapacity is personal

Under art. 105, the other party cannot invoke one party’s relative incapacity for its own benefit, nor does it automatically benefit capable co-interested persons, except where the common right or obligation is indivisible. C008. Planalto

Initial impossibility

Initial impossibility does not invalidate where it is only relative or ceases before the condition governing performance is realized. C009. Art. 106. Planalto

G1.4 Form: validity requirement versus evidence

General freedom of form

A declaration of will generally needs no special form unless the law expressly requires one. C010. Civil Code art. 107. Planalto

Mandatory public deed

A public deed is ordinarily essential for transactions constituting, transferring, modifying or renouncing real rights over real estate above the statutory threshold, unless the law provides otherwise. Real-property merits are deferred. C011. Art. 108. Planalto

Contractually chosen public instrument

If parties agree that the transaction will not be valid without a public instrument, that instrument becomes part of the substance of the act. C012. Art. 109. Planalto

Invalid instrument versus invalid transaction

Art. 183 says invalidity of the instrument does not invalidate the transaction where the transaction can be proved by another means. That rule cannot be used to evade a form that the law or parties made essential to validity under arts. 108–109 and 166(IV)–(V). C046. Civil Code arts. 166(IV)–(V), 183 and 212. Planalto+1

A bank receipt, electronic click, email or account entry can be evidence. It is not automatically the legally required consent, solemn form, representative authority or complete transaction instrument.

G1.5 Manifestation and interpretation

Mental reservation

A manifestation ordinarily remains effective despite an undisclosed mental reservation, unless the recipient knew of that reservation. C013. Civil Code art. 110. Planalto

Silence

Silence counts as assent only where circumstances or usage authorize it and express manifestation is unnecessary. C014. Art. 111. Planalto

Intention and language

Interpretation gives greater weight to the intention embodied in the declaration than to isolated literal wording. C015. Art. 112. Planalto

Good faith and the 2019 amendment

Current art. 113 requires good-faith and usage-based interpretation. The 2019 amendment added criteria including:

• subsequent conduct;
• market usage;
• good faith;
• the meaning more favorable to the identifiable non-drafting party; and
• the reasonable bargain inferred from the transaction and information available at formation.

Parties may establish their own interpretation and gap-filling rules, subject to mandatory law and applicable special regimes. C016. Civil Code art. 113; Lei 13.874 art. 7. Planalto+1

Benefits and waivers

Gratuitous transactions and waivers are interpreted strictly. C017. Civil Code art. 114. Planalto

G1.6 Representation and authority

C018–C022. Civil Code URL, arts. 115–120. Planalto

No actual SettleADebt authority, power of attorney, director authority, OAB authority or professional permission is determined.

G1.7 Consumer-law qualification

Where the transaction is a consumer relationship, the CDC can independently provide that:

• consumers must have an opportunity to know the contract’s content;
• difficult-to-understand instruments may not bind them;
• terms are interpreted more favorably to the consumer;
• private writings, receipts and precontracts can bind the supplier; and
• specified abusive provisions are null by operation of consumer law.

This means the Civil Code is not necessarily the exclusive validity regime for a consumer debt-service or credit transaction. Full CDC classification, unfair-term analysis, fee rules, withdrawal and remedies remain deferred. C082–C084. Full URL: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8078compilado.htm, arts. 2–3, 46–48 and 51. Planalto

G2. Nullity versus annulability

G2.1 Structural comparison

G2.2 Nullity grounds — art. 166

A transaction is null when:

1. concluded by an absolutely incapable person;
2. its object is unlawful, impossible or indeterminable;
3. the common determinative motive is unlawful;
4. it lacks the legally prescribed form;
5. an essential legal solemnity is omitted;
6. its purpose is to evade mandatory law; or
7. the law expressly declares it null or prohibits it without prescribing another sanction.

C023–C027. Full URL: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10406compilada.htm, art. 166(I)–(VII). Planalto

“Fraud of mandatory law” under art. 166(VI) is distinct from fraude contra credores under arts. 158–165, which is ordinarily an annulability ground.

G2.3 Simulation — art. 167

A simulated transaction is null. Simulation includes situations where:

• rights appear to be granted or transferred to a person other than the true recipient;
• the instrument contains an untrue declaration, confession, condition or clause; or
• a private instrument is antedated or postdated.

The concealed transaction may survive if valid in substance and form. Rights of good-faith third parties are protected. C028–C030. Planalto

The STJ’s Informativo 694 treated simulation as nullity rather than annulability, accepted recognition in third-party objections and emphasized the court’s ex officio authority on a proven record. That decision’s procedural posture does not decide every simulation dispute or eliminate proof requirements. C080. STJ

G2.4 Who can invoke nullity and what the court does

Any interested person may allege the nullities in arts. 166–167. The Ministério Público may do so where intervention is proper. When the court encounters the transaction or its effects and finds nullity proved, it must pronounce it and cannot cure it even at the parties’ request. C031. Civil Code art. 168. Planalto

That does not eliminate procedural due process, proof or the need for an appropriate dispute posture.

G2.5 No confirmation or convalidation by time

A null transaction cannot be confirmed and does not become valid merely through passage of time. C032. Art. 169. Planalto

This proposition concerns the transaction’s nullity. It does not by itself establish that every related restitution, damages, possession, accounting or enrichment claim has no time limit. C077.

G2.6 Conversion

A null transaction can be converted into another transaction if:

• it contains the requirements of that other transaction; and
• the parties’ objective permits the inference that they would have wanted the other transaction had they foreseen the nullity.

C033. Art. 170. Planalto

Conversion does not permit a court to manufacture missing mandatory elements or contradict the parties’ proved purpose.

G2.7 Annulability grounds

In addition to separately stated statutory cases, a transaction is annulable because of:

• relative incapacity; or
• error, dolo, coercion, state of danger, lesion or fraud against creditors.

C034. Art. 171. Planalto

G2.8 Confirmation

Express confirmation

An annulable transaction may be confirmed unless third-party rights are prejudiced. Express confirmation must state:

• the transaction’s substance; and
• the express will to maintain it.

C035–C036. Arts. 172–173. Planalto

Tacit confirmation

Express confirmation is unnecessary where the debtor voluntarily performs part of the transaction with knowledge of the defect. Mere continued payment without proven knowledge does not automatically satisfy art. 174. C037. Planalto

Effect

Valid confirmation or knowing voluntary performance extinguishes the actions and defenses the debtor had against the annulable transaction. C038. Art. 175. Planalto

Missing third-party authorization

Where annulability results from missing third-party authorization, later authorization validates the act. C039. Art. 176. Planalto

G2.9 Standing and effect before judgment

Annulability:

• has no effect before judicial recognition;
• is not declared ex officio;
• may be alleged only by interested parties; and
• ordinarily benefits only the party who invokes it, subject to solidarity or indivisibility.

C040. Art. 177. Planalto

G2.10 Decadence periods

Four-year periods — art. 178

C041. Planalto+1

Two-year fallback — art. 179

If another law says an act is annulable but provides no period, the period is two years from conclusion of the act. C042. Planalto

Art. 179 is not a fallback for a ground already governed by art. 178 or another specific period, such as art. 119’s 180 days.

G2.11 General decadence qualifications

Civil Code arts. 207–211 provide:

• prescription’s interruption, suspension and impediment rules generally do not apply to decadence unless the law says otherwise;
• arts. 195 and 198(I) apply to decadence;
• statutory decadence cannot validly be waived;
• the court must recognize statutory decadence ex officio;
• conventional decadence must be invoked by the beneficiary and is not supplied by the court.

C075–C076. Civil Code URL, arts. 207–211. Planalto+1

The ex officio recognition of elapsed statutory decadence is distinct from art. 177’s prohibition on the court independently annulling an annulable transaction.

G2.12 Minor’s false statement of age

A person aged 16–17 cannot use age to escape an obligation if that person:

• fraudulently concealed the age when asked; or
• declared being of age when undertaking the obligation.

This is not a rule covering children under 16, an innocent mistake, or every transaction involving a minor. C043. Art. 180. Planalto

G2.13 Payment to an incapable person

A party cannot recover what it paid under an annulled obligation to an incapable person unless it proves the payment benefited that person. C044. Art. 181. Planalto

The recoverable amount is not automatically the raw amount paid; actual benefit must be proved.

G2.14 Restoration after annulment

After annulment, parties are restored to their prior position; where restoration is impossible, equivalent compensation applies. C045. Art. 182. Planalto

This is a remedial baseline, not an automatic quantified award. Proof, benefits received, depreciation, impossibility, third-party rights, interest, damages and special law remain separate.

G2.15 Instrument, partial invalidity and accessories

• Invalidity of the instrument does not necessarily invalidate the transaction if it can be proved otherwise. C046.
• Partial invalidity does not invalidate a separable valid portion where consistent with the parties’ intention. C047.
• Invalidity of the principal obligation invalidates accessories; invalidity of an accessory does not automatically invalidate the principal. C047.

Arts. 183–184. Planalto

G3. Defects of the transaction

G3.1 Error or ignorance — arts. 138–144

C048–C052. Civil Code arts. 138–144. Planalto+1

A poor commercial prediction, later price movement or general regret is not automatically substantial error.

G3.2 Dolo — arts. 145–150

C053–C058. Civil Code arts. 145–150. Planalto

G3.3 Coercion — arts. 151–155

Coercion must create a well-founded fear of imminent and considerable harm to the person, family or property. For harm involving a nonfamily person, the court considers the circumstances. The assessment includes age, health, condition, temperament and other relevant facts. C059–C060. Planalto

The normal threat to exercise an actual legal right and mere reverential fear do not constitute coercion. C061. Planalto

Where coercion comes from a third party:

• if the beneficiary knew or should have known, it vitiates the transaction and the beneficiary is solidarily liable with the coercer for damages;
• if the beneficiary neither knew nor should have known, the transaction survives, while the coercer answers for damages.

C062. Planalto

G3.4 State of danger — art. 156

State of danger exists where a person:

• faces the need to save themselves or a family member from grave harm;
• the other party knows of that grave danger; and
• the person assumes an excessively onerous obligation.

For a nonfamily person, the court decides based on circumstances. C063. Planalto

Financial pressure alone is not automatically “grave harm” within this provision.

G3.5 Lesion — art. 157

Lesion requires:

1. pressing need or inexperience; and
2. a manifestly disproportionate prestation compared with the counter-prestation.

Disproportion is measured using values at the time the transaction was made. Annulment is not decreed if sufficient supplementation is offered or the favored party agrees to reduce its advantage. C064–C065. Planalto

The STJ’s Informativo 653 states that:

• both the objective and subjective elements must be proved;
• no fixed percentage defines disproportion;
• inexperience can be transaction-specific;
• mere economic interest in protecting an investment is not pressing need; and
• contradictory conduct can defeat the asserted lesion theory in the facts of that case.

C066. STJ

G3.6 Fraud against creditors — arts. 158–165

Gratuitous transfers and remission

A gratuitous transfer or remission can be annulled where the debtor:

• was already insolvent; or
• was rendered insolvent by the transaction,

even if the debtor did not know of the insolvency. The action belongs to unsecured creditors, and also to secured creditors whose security becomes insufficient. Only creditors existing when the act occurred may seek annulment. C067–C068. Planalto+1

Onerous contracts

An onerous contract of an insolvent debtor is annulable where insolvency was notorious or there was reason for the counterparty to know it. C069. Planalto

Purchaser’s deposit option

A purchaser who has not yet paid and agreed approximately market price may preserve the asset by depositing the price in court with citation of interested persons. If price was below market, the purchaser may deposit the real value. C070. Planalto

Defendants and third-party bad faith

The action may be brought against:

• the insolvent debtor;
• the person who contracted with the debtor; and
• bad-faith third-party acquirers.

C071. Planalto

Premature payment and preferences

• An unsecured creditor receiving payment of an unmatured debt from an insolvent debtor must restore it to the creditor pool.
• Security granted by an insolvent debtor to one creditor is presumed fraudulent as against other creditors.
• Ordinary transactions indispensable to maintaining a business or supporting the debtor and family are presumed in good faith and valid.
• Annulled value returns to the creditor pool; if the only object was a preferential security, only that preference is annulled.

C072–C074. Planalto

Full insolvency status, standing, creditor priority, ação pauliana procedure, proof and local procedure remain deferred.

G4. Fourteen fictional workflows

All actors, transactions, dates, values and documents are invented. No actual validity, deadline, award or discharge is determined.

H01 — Capable adult, ordinary form

Facts: A 35-year-old signs an ordinary unsecured written agreement whose object is lawful, possible and determinable. No special form is prescribed.

Claims: C007, C010, C013–C017.

Conditional result: The basic Civil Code capacity, object and form elements appear present. A private writing may be sufficient under art. 107.

Negative branch: Consumer law, professional authority, fraud, coercion, hidden illegality, lack of representative authority or another special statute can still affect validity.

Missing facts: Entire agreement, transaction purpose, signatures, authority, disclosures and applicable special law.

Exact next question: Is any statute or contractual clause making a more formal instrument essential to this transaction?

H02 — Mandatory form missing

Facts: Parties attempt through an informal message to transfer a real right for which art. 108 requires a public deed.

Claims: C011–C012, C026, C046.

Conditional result: If the legal public-deed predicate is satisfied and no exception applies, omission of the essential form points to nullity under art. 166(IV)–(V).

Negative branch: The agreement may be a preliminary obligation rather than the real-right transfer itself, or another statute may provide a different form.

Missing facts: Property, value, transaction nature, statutory exception and document.

Exact next question: Does the instrument itself transfer the real right, or merely promise a later formal transfer?

H03 — Relative incapacity

Facts: A 17-year-old enters an ordinary transaction without required assistance.

Claims: C003, C008, C034, C041, C043.

Conditional result: Relative incapacity points to annulability rather than automatic nullity.

Negative branch: The person may have been emancipated, properly assisted or within a transaction that the law permits independently.

Missing facts: Birth date, emancipation, assistance, transaction type and benefit.

Exact next question: What legal assistance or emancipation existed when the transaction was concluded?

H04 — Minor falsely declares adulthood

Facts: A 17-year-old is expressly asked about age and intentionally declares being 19 to obtain credit.

Claims: C043.

Conditional result: Art. 180 may prevent the minor from using age to escape the obligation.

Negative branch: The statement may have been innocent, the party may not have asked, or the person may have been under 16, for whom art. 180 does not supply the same rule.

Missing facts: Exact question, answer, intent, age and transaction.

Exact next question: Was the age intentionally concealed after inquiry, or was adulthood expressly declared at the act?

H05 — Substantial error versus poor bargain

Facts: A buyer signs believing the transaction concerns Asset A, while the document and counterparty concern Asset B. In an alternative branch, the buyer merely overestimated Asset A’s future value.

Claims: C048–C052.

Conditional result:

• Misidentification of the principal object can be substantial error if reasonable in context.
• A mistaken market prediction or later regret is not automatically art. 138 error.
• If context clearly identifies Asset A despite a mistaken label, art. 142 may preserve the transaction.
• A calculation mistake is ordinarily corrected under art. 143.

Missing facts: Communications, object descriptions, diligence and counterparty knowledge.

Exact next question: Did the mistake concern an essential existing fact or only an uncertain future expectation?

H06 — Causative versus incidental dolo

Facts: A seller conceals a fact. In Branch A, the buyer would not have contracted if told. In Branch B, the buyer would have contracted but negotiated a lower price.

Claims: C053–C055.

Conditional result:

• Branch A may support annulability for causative dolo.
• Branch B points to incidental dolo and damages rather than annulment.

Negative branch: The omitted fact may have been immaterial, known to the buyer or not subject to a disclosure duty.

Missing facts: Materiality, causation, knowledge and counterfactual transaction terms.

Exact next question: Would the transaction have occurred at all if the true fact had been disclosed?

H07 — Third-party coercion, beneficiary knew or did not know

Facts: A third party threatens a signer. In Branch A, the counterparty knows of the threat. In Branch B, the counterparty could not reasonably know.

Claims: C059–C062.

Conditional result:

• Branch A can vitiate the transaction and create solidary damages responsibility.
• Branch B preserves the transaction while the coercer can answer for damages.

Missing facts: Threat, immediacy, severity, counterparty knowledge and causal effect.

Exact next question: What facts show that the beneficiary knew or should have known of the coercion?

H08 — Legal demand versus reverential fear

Facts: A creditor says, “If you do not perform, I will file a lawful collection action.” In another branch, a person signs solely because a respected parent requests it.

Claims: C061.

Conditional result: Ordinary threat to exercise a lawful right and mere reverential fear are expressly excluded from coercion.

Negative branch: A fabricated criminal threat, unlawful seizure threat or abuse of dependency can be materially different.

Missing facts: Exact words, right asserted, relationship and surrounding pressure.

Exact next question: Was the threatened act a normal lawful remedy, or an unlawful/improper consequence?

H09 — State of danger

Facts: A person accepts an extremely onerous obligation to obtain urgent life-saving assistance for a family member, and the counterparty knows of the grave danger.

Claims: C063.

Conditional result: Those facts potentially fit state of danger.

Negative branch: Ordinary cash-flow distress, general anxiety or a counterparty unaware of the danger does not satisfy all predicates.

Missing facts: Grave harm, knowledge, family relationship and degree of onerousness.

Exact next question: What grave harm was imminent, and what proved the other party knew of it?

H10 — Lesion and proposed price adjustment

Facts: An inexperienced person under pressing need agrees to pay R$30,000 for a counter-performance worth R$10,000 at formation. The favored party later offers sufficient supplementation or reduction.

Claims: C064–C066.

Raw fictional ratio:

R$30,000 / R$10,000 = 3.0

This 3:1 ratio is only a fictional evidentiary input. The statute supplies no automatic percentage threshold.

Conditional result: Lesion still requires proof of pressing need or inexperience. If sufficient supplementation or reduction is offered, art. 157 §2 directs against annulment.

Negative branch: A sophisticated party’s later regret or self-created risk may not satisfy the subjective element.

Missing facts: Formation-time values, experience, need, negotiation and adequacy of adjustment.

Exact next question: What formation-time evidence proves both the disproportion and the protected party’s pressing need or inexperience?

H11 — Simulated transfer and good-faith third party

Facts: A debtor executes a sham transfer to Person B while secretly intending ownership to remain elsewhere. Person C later acquires in good faith.

Claims: C028–C031, C080.

Conditional result: The apparent simulated transfer is null; a concealed transaction survives only if substantively and formally valid. Good-faith third-party rights are preserved under art. 167 §2.

Negative branch: Person C may have known of the simulation or failed a special registration requirement.

Missing facts: True intention, instruments, consideration, registration and third-party good faith.

Exact next question: Was the concealed transaction independently valid in both substance and form?

H12 — Partially invalid clause

Facts: A multi-clause agreement contains one unlawful, severable provision; the remaining performance can operate independently.

Claims: C047, C084.

Conditional result: Art. 184 supports preserving the separable valid portion where consistent with the parties’ intent.

Negative branch: The unlawful clause may be essential, so removal would distort the bargain or cause excessive burden under applicable special law.

Missing facts: Transaction structure, integration clause, economic dependence and applicable consumer law.

Exact next question: Would the parties reasonably have entered the remaining transaction without the invalid provision?

H13 — Accessory invalidity versus main invalidity

Facts: A principal obligation has an invalid accessory penalty. In the alternative, the principal obligation itself is null.

Claims: C047.

Conditional result:

• Invalidity of the accessory does not automatically invalidate the principal.
• Invalidity of the principal ordinarily invalidates accessories.

Negative branch: The “accessory” may actually be an essential part of the consideration rather than legally separable.

Missing facts: Transaction structure and dependency.

Exact next question: Is the challenged provision legally accessory and separable from the principal obligation?

H14 — Confirmation claimed without knowledge

Facts: A party makes three payments after discovering inconvenience but before learning that the transaction was induced by dolo. The counterparty claims tacit confirmation.

Claims: C035–C038.

Conditional result: Art. 174 requires voluntary partial performance with knowledge of the defect. Performance before learning of the defect does not automatically confirm it.

Negative branch: Later payments made after full knowledge, accompanied by express maintenance of the transaction, may establish confirmation.

Missing facts: Date of knowledge, payments, communications and understanding of the defect.

Exact next question: What proves that the party knew the specific annulability defect when voluntarily performing?

Workflow count: 14, H01–H14.

Four conditional time calculations

These examples use invented dates. They illustrate the statutory starting events; they do not produce an actual legal filing deadline.

T01 — Four years from cessation of coercion

Stipulated facts

• Transaction concluded: January 10, 2026.
• Coercion ceases: Friday, February 20, 2026.
• No unresearched special rule changes the period.

Art. 178(I) starts the four-year period when coercion ceases—not on the transaction date.

Civil Code art. 132 convention:

• Day 0 / excluded opening day: February 20, 2026.
• Four civil years expire on the same-numbered date.
• Raw anniversary: Wednesday, February 20, 2030.

Formula:

February 20, 2026 + 4 civil years = February 20, 2030

The exact filing cut-off time, electronic-filing rule and local holiday calendar are procedural matters not decided here. C041, C079. Planalto+1

T02 — Four years from transaction date for error, dolo, danger or lesion

Stipulated transaction date: Thursday, October 15, 2026.

Under art. 178(II):

October 15, 2026 + 4 civil years = October 15, 2030

Raw anniversary: Tuesday, October 15, 2030.

The discovery date of the error or deception does not replace the transaction date under the text of art. 178(II). A different special statute could supply another rule, but none is assumed. C041, C079. Planalto+1

T03 — Four years from cessation of incapacity

Stipulated facts

• Relevant incapacity ceases Monday, March 1, 2027.
• Art. 178(III) applies.

Raw civil anniversary:

March 1, 2027 + 4 civil years = March 1, 2031

March 1, 2031 is a Saturday.

Art. 132 §1 expressly addresses a holiday endpoint. The Civil Code text alone does not establish that every Saturday is a holiday or determine the applicable court’s electronic-filing rule. The raw anniversary is March 1, 2031; any next-business-day procedural filing treatment requires the governing CPC/local court calendar and is held. C041, C075, C079. Planalto+1

T04 — Two-year art. 179 fallback

Stipulated facts

• Another statute says a transaction is annulable but provides no period.
• Transaction concluded Tuesday, June 30, 2026.
• Art. 179 genuinely applies.

Calculation:

June 30, 2026 + 2 civil years = June 30, 2028

Raw anniversary: Friday, June 30, 2028.

Art. 179 does not replace an existing specific four-year or 180-day period. C042, C079. Planalto+1

G5. P01 D02 old-to-new crosswalk

Literal reviewed P01 row preserved

Original coordinator status: explicit_deferred_hold_preserved.

PASS-14 narrow disposition

Crosswalk count: 15 visible rows—one literal preservation row plus 14 narrow dispositions.

PASS-14 source register

Access date for every source: October 26, 2026 PDT / October 27, 2026 UTC. Exact source-opening time: Unknown. HTML sources: Printed page and zero-based PDF index are N/A.

Displayed source count: 6.

No materially relied source failed. No alternate fetch or security workaround was needed.

Atomic claim/evidence register

Displayed claim count: 86, C_BR-P14-C001–C086.

Complete granular core coverage

Displayed core-coverage count: 130, P14-G01–G130.

Separately named deferred families

Displayed deferred-family count: 34.

All 27 inherited states and Distrito Federal

The jurisdiction names are inherited from the preserved P01 territorial inventory. No geography API, IBGE endpoint or fresh territorial enumeration was used. Federal Civil Code rules do not verify every local registry, court, notarial, proof, procedure or consumer implementation.

Displayed territorial count: 27; zero state/DF branches cleared.

Evidence-backed article, checklist and conditional-tool opportunities

A safe tool must never output “contract valid” or “contract void” from a checkbox alone. Its highest-confidence result should identify:

• candidate category;
• required proof;
• adverse branch;
• applicable clock candidate;
• special-law dependency; and
• unresolved judicial/local review.

Researcher self-check

Exact evidence required for an actual validity determination

1. Complete transaction and all annexes.
2. Identity, age and civil-capacity evidence for each natural person.
3. Any emancipation, curatorship or supported-decision instrument.
4. Legal-person constitutive documents and representation powers.
5. Transaction object and every promised act.
6. Statutory and agreed form requirements.
7. Original signatures, electronic-authentication trail and versions.
8. Negotiation chronology and disclosures.
9. Alleged error, concealment, threat, danger or inexperience evidence.
10. Formation-time valuations for lesion.
11. Insolvency and creditor chronology for fraud-against-creditors claims.
12. Evidence of counterparty or third-party knowledge.
13. Confirmation, ratification or later performance after defect knowledge.
14. Third-party rights and reliance.
15. Principal/accessory and severability structure.
16. Exact trigger dates for any decadence analysis.
17. Applicable consumer, professional, financial, property, company or sector law.
18. Applicable state/DF/local court, registry, notarial and filing rules.
19. Current official versions and later STJ/STF treatment on the actual decision date.

Final disposition: PASS-14 establishes the narrow current federal Civil Code gateway for capacity, object, form, representation, manifestation defects, nullity, annulability, confirmation, decadence, restoration and partial invalidity. It does not establish that any actual transaction is valid, null, annulable, confirmed, time-barred, enforceable, refundable, professionally authorized or accepted for any provider, locality or Brazil-wide model.

END C_BR PASS-14