Discount for those who pay rent on time does not prevent late fees

nila44

The incidence of the late payment fine on the full value of past due rentals does not constitute duplicity, disregarding the punctuality discount provided for in the contract. According to the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice, although the bonus and the fine have the same objective — to encourage the payment of the obligation —, they are institutes with different incidence hypotheses.


Thus, unanimously, the panel partially upheld the special appeal of a landlord who filed an eviction action due to non-payment, charging rent and accessories.

The lease contract defined both a bonus B2B Lead policy in case of punctual payment and a 10% fine in case of delay. The rental value was R$937.50, with a discount of R$187.50 for punctual payment, that is, a 20% reduction.

In the first instance, the judge upheld the requests to declare the rental contract terminated, order the eviction and order the tenants to pay the rent and accessories due, plus a late payment fine.

The Court of Justice of Paraná determined the exclusion of the fine, as it considered duplicity in the collection. The TJ-PR considered that failure to receive the benefit (20% discount) already constitutes, in itself, a measure of punishment.

Rapporteur of the appeal at the STJ, minister Nancy Andrighi pointed out that, although the punctuality bonus and the moratorium fine are both types of sanction — tending, therefore, to encourage compliance with an obligation —, there is a difference in relation to their applications.


While the allowance is a positive sanction, an encouragement technique whose purpose is to reward payment of rent in advance or on the agreed date, the fine is a negative sanction, applied in cases of default, and seeks to punish the debtor.



“The punctuality allowance, as an act of liberality by which the creditor encourages the debtor to pay on time, reveals itself not as a 'disguised moratorium fine', but as a cooperative behavior aimed at fulfilling the obligation, through which both parties parties benefit”, highlighted the minister when reforming the TJ-PR ruling and fully reinstating the sentence.