Os novos contornos da tutela do consumidor superendividado na Lei nº 14.181/2021: desafios interpretativos e análise jurisprudencial do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de Minas Gerais

Abstract

This article analyzes the tension between Brazil's advanced legal framework for consumer protection and the structural persistence of family over-indebtedness—a phenomenon aggravated by the consolidation of the contemporary credit society and by the digitalization of consumer relations, which intensifies the technical, legal, factual, and informational dimensions of consumer vulnerability. The research problem is as follows: to what extent has the Court of Justice of Minas Gerais (TJMG) incorporated, in its decisional practice, the institutes introduced by Law No. 14.181/2021? The hypothesis defended is that such incorporation, although progressive, is incomplete. The research, of a theoretical, bibliographical, and documentary nature, employs a deductive approach and a technical procedure of qualitative analysis of judgments, through the examination of six rulings handed down by the TJMG between July 30, 2025, and May 25, 2026. The results confirm the hypothesis and reveal three axes of incompleteness: the review-sanction based on the violation of the duties of information, loyalty, and care (arts. 52, 54-C, and 54-D of the Consumer Defense Code), whose effectiveness is compromised by the oscillating allocation of the burden of proof regarding irregular credit granting; consumer harassment (art. 54-C, IV), an institute not recognized in any of the analyzed judgments; and the existential minimum, the teleological core of the legal concept of over-indebtedness, whose assessment by the court presents great variation. The recent decision of the Federal Supreme Court in Claims of Noncompliance with a Fundamental Precept (ADPF) Nos. 1,005, 1,006, and 1,097 is also considered, which maintained the floor of R$ 600.00 for the existential minimum and determined the inclusion of payroll-deductible loans (crédito consignado) in its calculation. It is concluded that the effectiveness of Law No. 14.181/2021 depends, to a large extent, on the interpretation given to its institutes by the adjudicating bodies, with the review-sanction standing out—as it is not conditioned on a fixed quantitative parameter—as the instrument with the greatest protective potential for the over-indebted consumer.