The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation
annulled a ruling
from the National Chamber of Labor that ordered
the successive capitalization of interest
due to the application of the so-called act 2764/2022, in the agreement meeting this Thursday in a case for a
dismissal labor.
The Court considered that this criterion for calculating compensation for dismissal is not provided for in the law and caused in the case
a disproportionate increase in the sentence that reached 7745.30%.
This act was criticized by
several business chambers and some political sectors
considered it part of the supposed “labor trial industry.”
The Court, with the signature of Horacio Rosatti, Carlos Rosenkrantz, Juan Carlos Maqueda and Ricardo Lorenzetti, considered the ruling of Chamber IX arbitrary.
In a ruling, he understood that "even though the interest applicable to labor credits is a matter located within the reasonable discretion of the judges in the case, it is possible to deviate from such principle when the questioned decision, in addition to lacking legal support, arrives at
a manifestly disproportionate result that
disregards the economic reality existing at the time of the pronouncement.”
The ruling was in the case titled “Oliva, Favio Omar v COMA SA without dismissal” but
will serve as a precedent for other similar cases.
In this sense, he pointed out that “the periodic and successive capitalization ordered based on minute 2764/2022 of the National Chamber of Labor Appeals
does not find support in the provisions of the National Civil and Commercial Code
.”
The Supreme Court recalled that article 770 of the Civil and Commercial Code establishes a “clear rule” according to which
“interest is not owed on interest.”
Likewise, he stressed that said article establishes exhaustive exceptions and restrictive interpretation, which do not exist in the case.
The Court noted that “the contested decision and the record that supports it leave aside the general principle established by the legislator and create
an exception that is not legally contemplated
. ”
In the case, the Court said, the periodic and successive capitalization of interest led to a disproportionate
and unsupported
economic result , which represented an increase of 7745.30% of the capital of the sentence in a period of eight years.
For this reason, the Court ruled that “the appealed ruling
does not constitute a reasoned derivation of the current law
applicable to the proven circumstances of the case,” which is why it is arbitrary, and left the Chamber's ruling void.
In the case, Chamber IX of the National Chamber of Labor Appeals confirmed a sentence for labor compensation, increased its amount and ordered that
interest calculated according to the terms of Act 2764/2022 be added
to the capital of the sentence , invoking a alleged support in article 770 of the Civil and Commercial Code.
The application of the Act implied imposing the payment of interest calculated at active rates from the moment the labor credits become payable and, in addition, that these interests
be capitalized at the time of notification of the demand
and continue to be capitalized successively on an annual basis to date. of the settlement of the sentence, judicial sources explained.
Against this ruling, the defendant filed an extraordinary appeal.
Its denial motivated the presentation of a complaint that reached the Court and was resolved at the agreement meeting this Thursday.