The more evident and grotesque the material unconstitutionality

[mahbubamim077]

As explained above, there is an order in the analysis of legal business plans. Since the examination of the existence must precede the verification of the validity of the business, a judicial assessment of the possible illegality of a clause in the recovery plan before its approval is inappropriate.

The inadmissibility does not occur only for the theoretical reasons mentioned above, but also for practical reasons: art. 35, paragraph I, item "a" of law 11.101/2005 provides that it is the responsibility of the bulk sms hong kong general meeting of creditors to "approve, reject or modify the judicial recovery plan presented by the debtor".

In short: before the recovery plan is approved, the potentially invalid clause simply does not exist in the legal world. Therefore, something that does not even exist is not subject to legality control.

It is also possible to draw a parallel with public law that also leads to the same conclusion: the Federal Supreme Court (“STF”) understands that “jurisdictional control of the material constitutionality of bills is not permitted in the Brazilian system” (preventive control of standards in the process of being formed).