|
|
A practice that has become increasingly common is the recording of civil inquiries that investigate possible environmental degradation in the property registry. At the request of the Public Prosecutor's Office, some officials have registered the existence of these investigations in the public register and informed about this fact when asked to provide a registration certificate for a certain property. This type of annotation is sometimes treated as an endorsement and at other times as a simple filing [1] of information, but, regardless of this classification, it is always brought to the attention of anyone who requests information about the property, whether in person or through certificates, until the end of the investigation.
Two main arguments have been used to justify this procedure. The first is that making these notes would help prevent harmful events to the environment, as argued in an article published in B2B Lead ConJur [2] . The second is that it would ensure greater publicity about facts related to the property, which would be of interest to everyone. The legal grounds invoked to authorize it are articles 246 and 13, III, of Federal Law 6,015/73 (Registries Law) and article 26, VI of the National Organic Law of the Public Ministry.
Contrary to this understanding, which has already been supported by the TJ-SP [3] , this article argues that, although well intentioned, this procedure lacks legal support. Furthermore, it can cause real losses to property owners while doing little to effectively contribute to providing useful information to third parties who have an interest in the property or to preventing environmental degradation. Let's see.
Property registration was a mechanism created by society to provide greater security for businesses related to properties, which are assets historically considered relevant. Through it, the general public is made aware of specific legal facts related to these assets, allowing a safe flow of economic operations involving them. These facts are generally related to the constitution, declaration, alteration or extinction of real rights over real estate.
Not all information can be registered in the property register, even if its owner or third party judges it, based on personal, relevant criteria. If this had been possible, the registry would have turned into a real shambles and would have undermined its function of efficiently transmitting important facts relating to the property and enabling safe economic trafficking. Imagine, for example, if it were possible for the owner of a property to note on the registration number the fact that he had received an important personality there in the hope of reaping some appreciation from it; if a religious person could have registered in the property registry the occurrence of an event that was particularly important for their religion; or, even, if any authority deemed it prudent to record that a certain property was the target of numerous invasions by landless movements, or reports of noise disturbance, in order to prevent third parties interested in acquiring it from being surprised by this reality. There would be a chaotic, heterogeneous record that is not very useful for ensuring the safe carrying out of economic operations involving property.
|
|
發表於 2024-3-16 16:33:17