Civil Liability in Brazil: When You Are Required to Compensate Another Person

This page is a translation of the original Portuguese text, provided for convenience. It deals with Brazilian law. If there is any discrepancy, the Portuguese version prevails. Read the original in Portuguese

If you cause harm to another person, whether in a traffic accident, a fall in a poorly maintained place, or a financial loss, you may be required to make it right. That duty comes from civil liability, which rests on four pillars and is tempered by situations in which fault is not required.

What civil liability is and where Brazilian law sets it out

Civil liability is the legal duty to repair the harm one person causes to another. Its main purpose is not to punish but to restore: to put the victim, as far as possible, in the position he or she would have been in had the harm never occurred. That is why reparation is said to serve a primarily compensatory function rather than a punitive one.

The legal foundation is the Brazilian Civil Code. Article 186 defines an unlawful act as conduct in which a person, through a voluntary act or omission, negligence, or recklessness, violates another’s rights and causes harm, even if the harm is purely moral. Article 927 completes the reasoning by providing that anyone who commits an unlawful act is obligated to repair the harm caused.

Legal scholars divide the subject into two broad categories. Contractual liability arises from the breach of an agreement previously made between the parties, such as delivering a service that does not match what was agreed. Non-contractual liability, also called aquiliana (tort liability), results from the violation of a general duty of conduct where there is no prior contract, as when a driver hits a pedestrian he has never met.

It is important to distinguish civil liability from criminal liability. While the criminal sphere is concerned with punishing conduct that society condemns most severely, the civil sphere focuses on compensating the person who suffered the loss. A single event can have consequences in both areas, which proceed independently and do not always reach the same result.

The four pillars of fault-based liability

The most traditional form is fault-based liability, which requires proof of fault. For the duty to compensate to arise in this case, legal scholarship and court decisions point to four elements that must all be present:

• Conduct: the act or omission of the person responsible. Someone acts when he hits a pedestrian while driving at excessive speed; someone fails to act when he neglects to mark a wet, slippery floor.
• Harm: the actual loss suffered by the victim, which may be material (economic loss), moral (damage to honor and dignity), or aesthetic (a permanent change in appearance).
• Causation: the direct link between the conduct and the harm, so that the loss is the result of that specific behavior and not of some other cause.
• Fault: acting with negligence, recklessness, or lack of professional skill, or with intent (dolo) when there is a deliberate purpose to cause the harm.

Fault takes three classic forms. Negligence is a lack of care, such as failing to maintain the sidewalk in front of a business. Recklessness is rash action, such as passing on a blind curve. Lack of professional skill (imperícia) means a lack of technical competence, a situation that often arises in mistakes made by professionals in the course of their work.

If any one of these elements is missing, a claim for compensation is likely to be rejected. Harm without identifiable conduct, or conduct that caused no concrete loss, generally does not create a duty to compensate under fault-based liability. The absence of causation, in fact, is among the most common defenses in this area.

Civil liability is the legal duty to repair the harm one person causes to another.

Strict liability: when fault does not matter

In certain situations, the law does not require proof of fault. This is strict liability (responsabilidade objetiva), founded on the theory of risk: a person who carries on an activity that creates danger for others must bear the losses that result from it, even if he acted with due care. The focus shifts from the conduct of the person responsible to the risk created by the activity itself.

The sole paragraph of Article 927 of the Civil Code establishes this principle. It provides for a duty to repair the harm, regardless of fault, when the activity normally carried on by the person who caused the harm, by its nature, entails a risk to the rights of others. In these cases, the debate over negligence or recklessness loses practical importance.

Many everyday situations fall under this regime. The Consumer Protection Code holds suppliers liable for defective products and services without requiring proof of fault. The Constitution, in Article 37, paragraph 6, imposes strict liability on the State for harm that its agents cause to private individuals. The Civil Code, in Articles 932 and 933, holds parents liable for the acts of their minor children and employers liable for the acts of their employees.

Everyday examples and how compensation is measured

Civil liability shows up in ordinary events. A fall caused by a wet, unmarked floor in a supermarket, an accident caused by abrupt and inattentive braking, or an object falling from a balcony onto a parked car are common scenarios that can give rise to a duty to compensate, depending on the elements present in each case.

Once the obligation is recognized, the question becomes how much. Article 944 of the Civil Code sets the central criterion: compensation is measured by the extent of the harm. The greater the proven loss, the greater the compensation tends to be, covering both what the victim actually lost and what he or she reasonably failed to earn.

In the case of moral damages, the amount takes into account the seriousness of the offense, the impact of the event, and the financial capacity of the parties, always taking care that the sum does not become a source of unjust enrichment. Setting the amount is up to the judge, who weighs the specific circumstances presented in the case.

Some factors reduce or eliminate the duty to compensate. If the victim contributed to the outcome, this is called concurrent fault, and the amount may be reduced proportionally. Unforeseeable events (caso fortuito) and force majeure, as well as the victim’s sole fault, break the chain of causation and can exclude the liability of the person identified as responsible.

Time matters too. A claim for civil compensation generally expires after the three-year period set by the Civil Code, counted from when the victim learns of the harm and who caused it. Evidence is often decisive: photographs, witnesses, expert reports, and documents help show the conduct, the harm, and the link between them.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between civil liability and criminal liability?

Civil liability seeks to repair the victim’s loss, generally through a monetary award. Criminal liability aims to punish the perpetrator of a crime, with penalties such as imprisonment or restrictions on rights. A single event, such as a serious accident, can lead to both consequences at the same time, in independent proceedings that run in separate courts and may end in different outcomes.

Can I seek compensation for both moral and material damages in the same case?

Yes. Brazil’s higher courts allow compensation for material and moral damages to be combined when they arise from the same event. Material damages restore the economic loss, while moral damages compensate for harm to dignity, honor, or psychological integrity. When there is a permanent change in appearance, aesthetic damages may also be added to the other claims.

How long do I have to file a claim for compensation?

For most civil compensation cases, the Civil Code sets a three-year limitation period, counted from the moment the victim learns of the harm and who caused it. Specific deadlines apply to certain types of relationships, such as consumer relationships, which is why it is wise to evaluate each situation carefully before filing a lawsuit.

As informações deste artigo são de caráter informativo e não substituem consulta jurídica individualizada. Cada caso possui particularidades que exigem análise específica.