## Facts

- AJURIS is an association of state judges in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
- Judges in Rio Grande do Sul received judicial salary amounts (salary differences) after a delay and sought monetary correction (cost-of-living adjustment) for the overdue sums.
- AJURIS filed an original action (AO 152) against the State of Rio Grande do Sul seeking monetary correction on the overdue judicial salary payments.
- Article 5(XXI) of the Brazilian Constitution allows an association to represent its members in court if it has the express authorization of its members.
- AJURIS’s bylaws authorized it to litigate to protect members’ interests.
- AJURIS obtained authorization from a majority of its members to bring the suit at a general meeting.
- The State argued AJURIS could pursue relief only for judges who had expressly and individually consented, not for the full membership based on the general-meeting vote.
- In a rapporteur opinion, Justice Carlos Velloso agreed that monetary correction was owed but would have limited the relief to members who individually and expressly consented; the plenary reconsidered that standing limitation in light of the general-meeting authorization.

## Issues

1. Under Article 5(XXI) of the Brazilian Constitution, does an association have standing to sue on behalf of all its members when its bylaws authorize representation and a majority of members expressly authorize the lawsuit in a general meeting, or is individual written consent from each member required?
2. Are judges entitled to monetary correction (cost-of-living adjustment) on judicial salary differences paid late by the State, given the wage-like (subsistence) nature of judicial remuneration?

## Decision

- The court granted relief to AJURIS in the original action.
- It held that AJURIS satisfied the Constitution’s “express authorization” requirement through (a) bylaw authority to litigate for members and (b) an express authorization approved by a majority at a general meeting, so AJURIS could proceed on behalf of the members covered by that authorization.
- It rejected the State’s attempt to restrict relief solely to members who provided individualized, express consents.
- On the merits, it held that monetary correction was due on salary differences paid with delay, because delayed payment reduces the real value of wage-like public remuneration.
- The action was received and adjudged meritorious, resulting in liability for the State to pay the requested monetary correction on the overdue judicial salary amounts.

## Legal Principles

- An association has constitutional standing under Article 5(XXI) to represent members judicially when it is expressly authorized by its membership; express authorization may be established through formal collective approval in a general meeting when the association’s bylaws permit such representation.
- When an association is properly authorized to represent its members, the litigation and resulting relief are not limited only to members who provide separate, individualized mandates, if the association obtained valid express authorization through its internal governance process.
- Monetary correction may be awarded on late-paid salary differences to preserve the real value of amounts already owed; such correction addresses loss from delay and inflation rather than granting a new increase in remuneration.
- Public salaries and wages have a subsistence character, supporting monetary correction when payment is delayed.

## Conclusion

In AO-152 (1999), Brazil’s Supreme Court held that AJURIS could represent its members based on its bylaws and express authorization granted by a majority vote in a general meeting, and it granted monetary correction on judicial salary differences paid late by the State of Rio Grande do Sul to preserve the real value of wage-like remuneration.


AJURIS v. State of Rio Grande Do Sul, Original Action 152-8 (Rio Grande do Sul) AO-152 (1999)