LEI No. 11,280, February 16, 2006.

Altera the arts. 112, 114, 154, 219, 253, 305, 322, 338, 489 and 555 of the Act no 5,869, of January 11, 1973-Code of Civil Procedure, concerning relative incompetence, electronic means, prescription, distribution by dependence, exception of incompetence, disclosure, precatory and rogatory letter, rescisive action and view of the autos; and revoke the art. 194 of the Law no 10,406, of January 10, 2002-Civil Code.

THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC I do know that the National Congress decrees and I sanction the following Law:

Art. 1º The arts. 112 and 114 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, go on to invigorate with the following essay:

" Art. 112. ..................................................................

Paragraph single. The nullity of the election clause of venue, in contract of accession, may be declared of office by the judge, who shall decline from competence to the judgment of domicile of the defendant. " (NR)

" Art. 114. It will extend to the jurisdiction if it the judge does not decline in the form of the single paragraph of the art. 112 of this Act or the defendant does not opuser declinatory exception in cases and legal deadlines. " (NR)

Art. 2º The art. 154 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 154. ..................................................................

Paragraph single. The courts, within the framework of the respective jurisdiction, will be able to discipline the practice and the official communication of procedural acts by electronic means, met the requirements of authenticity, integrity, legal validity and interoperability of the Brazilian Public Key Infrastructure-ICP-Brazil. " (NR)

Art. 3º The art. 219 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 219. ..................................................................

..................................................................

§ 5º The judge will pronounce, of trade, the prescription.

.................................................................. " (NR)

Art. 4º The art. 253 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 253. ..................................................................

..................................................................

II-when, having been extinguished the process, without judgment of merit, is reiterated the application, albeit in litisconsortium with other authors or that are partially changed the defendants of the demand;

III-when there is ajuure of identical actions, to the preventative judgement.

.................................................................. " (NR)

Art. 5º The art. 305 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 305. ..................................................................

Paragraph single. In the exception of incompetence (art. 112 of this Act), the petition may be protocolized in the judgment of domicile of the respondent, with an application for his immediate remittance to the judgment that determined the citation. " (NR)

Art. 6º The art. 322 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 322. Against the revel that does not have a patron in the autos, they will run the deadlines regardless of subpoena, from the publication of each decision-making act.

Paragraph single. The revel will be able to intervene in the process at any stage, receiving it in the state where it is found. " (NR)

Art. 7º The art. 338 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 338. The precatory letter and the rogatory letter will suspend the case, in the case provided for in paragraph (b) of the inciso IV of the art. 265 of this Act, when, having been required prior to the sanitation decision, the evidence on them requested to present itself is indispensable.

.................................................................. " (NR)

Art. 8º The art. 489 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 489. The help of the rescission action does not preclude the fulfilment of the sentence or judgment rescinding, rescinding the concession, if indispensable and under the assumptions provided for in law, of measures of a cautionary nature or anticipatory of guardianship. " (NR)

Art. 9º The art. 555 of Law No. 5,869, of January 11, 1973, Code of Civil Procedure, passes the invigoration with the following essay:

" Art. 555. ..................................................................

..................................................................

§ 2º Not considering entitled to immediately proclaim your vote, to any judge is faculty to request view of the process, having to return it within 10 (ten) days, counted from the date on which it received it; the trial will proceed in the 1a (first) subsequent ordinary session to the devolution, dispensed new publication in tariff.

§ 3º In the case of § 2º of this article, not returned the autos in the deadline, nor expressly requested its extension by the judge, the presiding judge's chairman will request the proceedings and reopen the trial in the subsequent ordinary session, with publication in tariff. " (NR)

Art. 10. This Act comes into force 90 (ninety) days after the date of its publication.

Art. 11. It is revoked the art. 194 of Law No. 10,406, of January 10, 2002, Civil Code.

Brasilia, February 16, 2006; 185º of Independence and 118º of the Republic.

LUIZ INACIO LULA DA SILVA

Márcio Thomaz Bastos