The firm, safeguarding the interests of an assembly company, obtained a favorable judicial decision before the Superior Labor Court (TST) to set aside the recognition of an economic group and to exclude the company from the proceedings.
Understand the case: the Regional Labor Court of the 2nd Region, upholding the judgment rendered at first instance, found there to be joint and several liability between the companies for the labor obligations owed to the employee, given that the two companies operated in the same line of business and had a partner in common, on the basis of article 2, paragraph 2, of the Consolidation of Labor Laws (CLT).
However, the labor reform amended article 2 of the CLT, modifying paragraph 2 and adding paragraph 3.
Thus, paragraph 2 established that whenever one or more companies, even if they have their own legal personality, are under the direction, control or administration of another, or further when, even while preserving their autonomy, they are part of the same economic group.
Paragraph 3, in turn, provides that the mere identity of partners does not characterize an economic group, it being necessary to demonstrate the integrated interest and effective community of interests, as well as the joint action of the companies of this common partner.
In the case at hand[1], applying the legislation that instituted the labor reform, the TST held that the court of origin rendered a decision contrary to the law, stating in its ruling that the mere existence of common partners and of a coordination relationship between the companies does not constitute elements sufficient for the configuration of an economic group, the existence of control and oversight by a leading company over the other companies being indispensable.
Read also:
Reorganization of an economic group – proof of operation for more than two years
[1] Case No. TST-RR-1000130-73.2017.5.02.0073
← Back to blog