Questão 51 Remoção do concurso de Cartórios TJ-RO 2025: É devida pensão por morte de filho menor?

Question 51 Suppose that, as a result of an unlawful act, a minor child from a low-income family has died. In this case, according to the understanding of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), A. Only compensation for moral damages will be due, and the payment of a monthly pension to the parents of the deceased will be prohibited. B. A monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, given the absolute presumption of economic dependence of the parents on the child. C. A monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, provided that the economic dependence of the parents on the child is proven. D. No monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased. E. A monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, given the relative presumption of economic dependence of the parents on the child. In this video, we will solve Question 51 and definitively understand how the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) judges cases of civil liability involving the payment of a monthly pension to parents for the death of a minor child. 📚 Follow the question addressed in the video: Question 51 Suppose that, as a result of an unlawful act, a minor child from a low-income family has died. In this case, according to the understanding of the STJ (Superior Court of Justice), A) only compensation for moral damages will be due, and the payment of a monthly pension to the parents of the deceased is prohibited. B) a monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, given the absolute presumption of economic dependence of the parents on the child. C) a monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, provided that the economic dependence of the parents on the child is proven. D) no monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased. E) a monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, given the relative presumption of economic dependence of the parents on the child. ✅ Answer: Alternative E (a monthly pension will be due to the parents of the deceased, given the relative presumption of economic dependence of the parents on the child). 💡 Explanation Summary: To help you ace this topic on any exam, we've broken down the answer choices in the video: Why are options A and D incorrect? The jurisprudence of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) is consistent in admitting the payment of monthly alimony to parents, and it is perfectly possible to combine this alimony with compensation for moral damages. Why is option C incorrect? When dealing with a low-income family, the STJ understands that the economic dependence of parents on their children is presumed for the purpose of supporting the household, dispensing with the requirement of rigorous proof from the family. Why is option B incorrect? The error lies in the word "absolute." The presumption of economic dependence in the case of low-income families is relative (also called in law a rebuttable presumption), which means that it allows for evidence to the contrary by the defendant. The STJ Rule (Alternative E): The established understanding is clear: if a minor child in a low-income family dies due to an unlawful act, the monthly pension is due to the parents, based on the relative presumption that the minor would have contributed to the family's support.