08/09/2025

Rio de Janeiro Court of Justice annuls municipal capital gains charge for glass balconies

Source: TJRJ
When residents of a condominium in Barra da Tijuca, in the West Zone of
Rio, decided to close their balconies with retractable glass curtains in 2016, they did not
imagine that the new decoration would cost a fee of R$ 14 thousand with the
City Hall of Rio de Janeiro as "added value" and that, if they did not pay,
the facilities would be demolished and would still bear a progressive fine a
ser to the Municipality. Dissatisfied with the charge, they filed a
lawsuit in court in the same period in which the Public Prosecutor's Office of Rio de Janeiro also >would authorize the collection, and thus managed to reverse the situation.
The most recent decision of the 4th Chamber of Public Law of the Court of Justice
of Rio de Janeiro (TJRJ) confirmed the decision of the first instance to judge
the residents' request, declaring the nullity of the municipal administrative
proceedings and the cancellation of the charge made.
Despite the fact that the City Hall of Rio appeal and file appeals to try to change the
decision, the case of the charge of capital gain for the placement of a glass curtain
retractable had already been settled in the public civil action that the MP opened
previously. In the process, the court confirmed that the collection was irregular
considering that the curtains do not, in fact, increase the total area of the property
nor do they affect the calculation basis of the Urban Territorial Property Tax (IPTU).
In addition, Complementary Law No. 145/2014, regulated by Decree
Municipal No. 39,345/2014, was also judged unconstitutional, since it exempted
the South Zone of the city from the same charge.
With the dirty name in the square
One of the people who suffered from the collection of the counterpart to the Municipality
was a chemical engineer whose name was registered in active debt. He only discovered >with retractable glass, when R$ 17 thousand from his savings account were seized.
He filed a lawsuit against the Municipality of Rio and won. The 3rd Chamber of >Ativa and extinguish the tax enforcement proceeding against him.
But after all, how to differentiate when the collection of capital gains is valid
in these cases?
According to Municipal Complementary Law No. 145/2014, The closure of
balconies for protection against the weather in residential buildings is allowed
as long as it meets certain criteria. Closure is authorized if it is by a retractable system><, which allows the opening of openings, in colorless and
translucent material; and that does not result in a real increase in the area of the unit
residential or that the balcony is incorporated, in whole or in part, into the internal compartments of the house
, under penalty of a fine.
Under these conditions, precedent No. 384 of the TJRJ jurisprudence rules out the
need for urban licensing for balcony closure by
glass curtain by nnot to configure work, as long as it does not imply in
transformation of the balcony into a new habitable room of the unit.
Processes No.: 0395607-03.2016.8.19.0001 / 0036473-21.2016.8.19.0001 /
0296546-96.2021.8.19.0001