English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Although the Federal Supreme Court has ruled that the owner of immovable property without animus domini is not a taxpayer or responsible for IPTU, the premise used by the High Praetor in the judgment of Extraordinary Remedies 594.015 and 601.720 may represent a change in the way which the Court interprets the institute. With this scope, this article intends to review the institutes that permeate the matter, with a view to understanding the limits of the judicial decisions of the mentioned resources, as well as to evaluate the hermeneutical consequence of the eventual paradigm shift.

revista de direito tributário e financeiro

O JULGAMENTO DOS RECURSOS EXTRAORDINÁRIOS Nº 594.015 E 601.720 E A REVISÃO JURISPRUDENCIAL A RESPEITO DA LEGITIMIDADE PASSIVA DO IPTU NA HIPÓTESE DE POSSUIDOR SEM ANIMUS DOMINI