## Facts

- União Brasileira de Compositores (UBC) is a nonprofit civil association that works within Brazil’s collective music-rights administration structure, collaborating with the Central Office for Author’s Rights (ECAD) in matters affecting authors’ royalties.
- Arthur Rodrigues Vilarinho was a member of UBC and was subject to internal disciplinary proceedings for alleged statutory and internal-rule violations.
- Before imposing discipline, UBC appointed a special committee to investigate the alleged violations and review documentation submitted by UBC.
- The committee met and evaluated the materials presented, but Vilarinho alleged he was not given a real chance to present a defense or submit evidence in his favor before the sanction was imposed.
- UBC ultimately excluded Vilarinho from the association’s membership roster.
- Vilarinho sued in the Rio de Janeiro state courts, claiming that the exclusion violated his constitutional right to adversarial process and full defense (Constitution, art. 5, LV).
- The Rio de Janeiro appellate court annulled the penalty and ordered reinstatement, finding that the committee should have allowed Vilarinho to defend himself and produce evidence.
- UBC filed Extraordinary Appeal No. 201.819/RJ to the Supreme Federal Court (STF), arguing that constitutional due-process guarantees should not govern internal disciplinary acts of a private association.

## Issues

1. Whether the constitutional guarantees of adversarial process and full defense (art. 5, LV) apply in a dispute between private parties when a private association expels a member.
2. Whether a civil association’s freedom of self-organization and statutory autonomy permits exclusion of a member without offering a meaningful opportunity to defend and present evidence.
3. Whether UBC’s role in the music-rights and royalty system justifies direct application of constitutional procedural guarantees to its disciplinary proceedings.

## Decision

- The STF (Second Panel) took cognizance of the extraordinary appeal but denied it, leaving the state-court judgment in place.
- The Court held that fundamental-rights violations can occur in private-law relationships and that constitutional guarantees may bind private legal entities, not only the State.
- The Court ruled that UBC could not exclude Vilarinho without guaranteeing adversarial process and full defense consistent with art. 5, LV.
- The Court treated associations that exercise predominant power in a given economic and/or social field—creating member dependence—as operating in a “public space,” even if non-state, and therefore subject to direct constitutional limits when they impose severe sanctions.
- The Court emphasized that exclusion from UBC significantly burdens a composer, including by affecting receipt of royalties tied to the performance of musical works and limiting professional activity on equal terms with other composers.
- The majority view was written in the judgment authored by Justice Gilmar Mendes (as relator for the opinion), after a request for review; Justices Joaquim Barbosa and Celso de Mello joined.
- A dissenting view (associated with Justice Ellen Gracie, the original relator, joined by Justice Carlos Velloso) would have treated the matter as governed chiefly by the association’s statutes and civil law, rejecting constitutional review as the basis for reinstatement.

## Legal Principles

- Fundamental rights may apply directly in private relationships (horizontal effect), including disputes between a member and a private association.
- Freedom of association and internal self-organization are constitutionally protected, but they are not unlimited; private autonomy cannot justify procedures that violate constitutional guarantees owed to members.
- When a private association’s decisions materially affect a member’s ability to receive income tied to professional activity, constitutional procedural protections—notice, adversarial participation, and full defense—must be afforded before exclusion.
- Courts may annul an expulsion based on lack of procedural fairness without deciding whether the alleged misconduct occurred.

## Conclusion

In RE 201.819/RJ, the Supreme Federal Court affirmed the annulment of UBC’s exclusion of Arthur Rodrigues Vilarinho, holding that constitutional guarantees of adversarial process and full defense can bind private associations, particularly where the association’s disciplinary action has serious economic and professional consequences for the member.


Uniao Brasileira de Compositores UBC v. Arthur Rodrigues Vilarinho, Extraordinary Appeal number 201.819/RJ (2005)