Background
Hapvida Assistência Médica S.A. filed an agravo em recurso especial—a procedural appeal seeking review after a special appeal was denied admission. The challenged decision had been served on December 23, 2025, but Hapvida did not file its appeal until February 11, 2026.
The STJ’s Presidency declined to hear the appeal as untimely. Hapvida then filed an internal appeal, asserting that its earlier filing was timely and requesting either reconsideration by the original decision-maker or review by the Fourth Panel. The opposing party contested the internal appeal and requested an increase in attorney fees.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth Panel unanimously denied the internal appeal and left the Presidency’s decision in place. Under Articles 219 and 1,003(5) of Brazil’s Code of Civil Procedure, both a special appeal and an agravo em recurso especial must be filed within 15 business days. Hapvida filed after that period without submitting proof, at the time of filing, of any local holiday or suspension affecting the deadline.
The STJ had notified Hapvida under Article 1,003(6) to establish any suspension, interruption, or extension of the filing period, but the company did not respond. Its internal appeal therefore provided no basis to overcome the untimeliness finding. The Panel also declined to award an additional fee increase for the internal appeal, explaining that its precedent does not permit the increase authorized by Article 85(11) merely upon deciding an internal appeal or motion for clarification.
Key Takeaways
- A special appeal or agravo em recurso especial must be filed within 15 business days.
- A party relying on a local holiday or suspension of the procedural deadline must provide the required proof; failure to respond when invited to cure the defect leaves an untimely appeal barred.
- The STJ does not impose an additional Article 85(11) attorney-fee increase solely for adjudicating an internal appeal or motion for clarification.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the strict treatment of appellate deadlines before the STJ. Counsel must calculate the 15-business-day period carefully and timely document any event that changes it; an unsupported assertion of timeliness in a later internal appeal will not revive the filing.
It also clarifies the limited role of appellate fee increases: although the Presidency conditionally increased any fees previously awarded when declining to hear the original appeal, the Fourth Panel would not add another increase merely because it rejected the internal appeal.