{"id":673035,"date":"2026-04-24T14:51:47","date_gmt":"2026-04-24T12:51:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/"},"modified":"2026-04-24T14:51:47","modified_gmt":"2026-04-24T12:51:47","slug":"acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/","title":{"rendered":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"kji-decision\">\n<p class=\"kji-summary\">Relator: GRA?A AMARAL. I &#8212; ? o pedido formulado pelo autor na peti??o que baliza a interven??o do tribunal. II &#8212; Constitui ?nus do autor colmatar o deficit petit?rio atrav?s da amplia??o do pedido (art. 265.?, n.? 2, do CPC). N?o o tendo feito, n?o pode o juiz, oficiosamente, suprir tal omiss?o. III &#8212; A edifica??o constru?da na pend?ncia do casamento, sob regime de separa??o de bens, em terreno da exclusiva propriedade de um dos c?njuges, atrav?s de montantes suportados tamb?m pelo outro c?njuge, n?o faz este adquirir qualquer direito de (com)propriedade sobre a mesma. IV &#8212; Destinando-se a ac??o de divis?o de coisa comum a p?r termo ? contitularidade de direitos reais, mostra-se manifestamente improcedente (por a causa de pedir invocada n?o poder conduzir ao deferimento da pretens?o deduzida) o pedido de divis?o de coisa comum referente a im?vel constru?do em terreno da propriedade do outro c?njuge, na pend?ncia do casamento, sob o regime de separa??o de bens, atrav?s de montantes igualmente suportados pelo outro. V &#8212; Nestas circunst?ncias, a compensa??o da atribui??o patrimonial por parte da autora cuja causa jur?dica se extinguiu pela dissolu??o do casamento ? pass?vel de poder ser tutelada pelo instituto do enriquecimento sem causa.<\/p>\n<hr class=\"kji-sep\" \/>\n<p class=\"kji-source-links\"><strong>Sources officielles :<\/strong> <a class=\"kji-source-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.dgsi.pt\/jstj.nsf\/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814\/dc90628a5fccfcf9802587f20034c585?OpenDocument&#038;ExpandSection=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"kji-license-note\"><em>Portails officiels portugais (DGSI \/ Tribunal Constitucional). Republication en metadata_only par prudence licencielle ; consulter la source officielle pour le texte authentique.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Relator: GRA?A AMARAL. I &#8212; ? o pedido formulado pelo autor na peti??o que baliza a interven??o do tribunal. II &#8212; Constitui ?nus do autor colmatar o deficit petit?rio atrav?s da amplia??o do pedido (art. 265.?, n.? 2, do CPC). N?o o tendo feito, n?o pode o juiz, oficiosamente, suprir tal omiss?o. III &#8212; A edifica??o constru?da na pend?ncia do casamento, sob regime de separa??o de bens, em terreno da exclusiva propriedade de um dos c?njuges, atrav?s de montantes suportados tamb?m pelo outro c?njuge, n?o faz este adquirir qualquer direito de (com)propriedade sobre a mesma. IV &#8212; Destinando-se a ac??o de divis?o de coisa comum a p?r termo ? contitularidade de direitos reais, mostra-se manifestamente improcedente (por a causa de pedir invocada n?o poder conduzir ao deferimento da pretens?o deduzida) o pedido de divis?o de coisa comum referente a im?vel constru?do em terreno da propriedade do outro c?njuge, na pend?ncia do casamento, sob o regime de separa??o de bens, atrav?s de montantes igualmente suportados pelo outro. V &#8212; Nestas circunst?ncias, a compensa??o da atribui??o patrimonial por parte da autora cuja causa jur?dica se extinguiu pela dissolu??o do casamento ? pass?vel de poder ser tutelada pelo instituto do enriquecimento sem causa.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7762],"kji_court":[7763],"kji_chamber":[8887],"kji_year":[32183],"kji_subject":[7612],"kji_keyword":[7772,7774,7771,7773,7636],"kji_language":[7770],"class_list":["post-673035","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-portugal","kji_court-supremo-tribunal-de-justica","kji_chamber-6-seco","kji_year-32183","kji_subject-fiscal","kji_keyword-acordao","kji_keyword-justica","kji_keyword-processo","kji_keyword-supremo","kji_keyword-tribunal","kji_language-pt"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.5 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Relator: GRA?A AMARAL. I - ? o pedido formulado pelo autor na peti??o que baliza a interven??o do tribunal. II - Constitui ?nus do autor colmatar o deficit petit?rio atrav?s da amplia??o do pedido (art. 265.?, n.? 2, do CPC). N?o o tendo feito, n?o pode o juiz, oficiosamente, suprir tal omiss?o. III - A edifica??o constru?da na pend?ncia do casamento, sob regime de separa??o de bens, em terreno da exclusiva propriedade de um dos c?njuges, atrav?s de montantes suportados tamb?m pelo outro c?njuge, n?o faz este adquirir qualquer direito de (com)propriedade sobre a mesma. IV - Destinando-se a ac??o de divis?o de coisa comum a p?r termo ? contitularidade de direitos reais, mostra-se manifestamente improcedente (por a causa de pedir invocada n?o poder conduzir ao deferimento da pretens?o deduzida) o pedido de divis?o de coisa comum referente a im?vel constru?do em terreno da propriedade do outro c?njuge, na pend?ncia do casamento, sob o regime de separa??o de bens, atrav?s de montantes igualmente suportados pelo outro. V - Nestas circunst?ncias, a compensa??o da atribui??o patrimonial por parte da autora cuja causa jur?dica se extinguiu pela dissolu??o do casamento ? pass?vel de poder ser tutelada pelo instituto do enriquecimento sem causa.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0430\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\\\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-24T12:51:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\\\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22","og_description":"Relator: GRA?A AMARAL. I - ? o pedido formulado pelo autor na peti??o que baliza a interven??o do tribunal. II - Constitui ?nus do autor colmatar o deficit petit?rio atrav?s da amplia??o do pedido (art. 265.?, n.? 2, do CPC). N?o o tendo feito, n?o pode o juiz, oficiosamente, suprir tal omiss?o. III - A edifica??o constru?da na pend?ncia do casamento, sob regime de separa??o de bens, em terreno da exclusiva propriedade de um dos c?njuges, atrav?s de montantes suportados tamb?m pelo outro c?njuge, n?o faz este adquirir qualquer direito de (com)propriedade sobre a mesma. IV - Destinando-se a ac??o de divis?o de coisa comum a p?r termo ? contitularidade de direitos reais, mostra-se manifestamente improcedente (por a causa de pedir invocada n?o poder conduzir ao deferimento da pretens?o deduzida) o pedido de divis?o de coisa comum referente a im?vel constru?do em terreno da propriedade do outro c?njuge, na pend?ncia do casamento, sob o regime de separa??o de bens, atrav?s de montantes igualmente suportados pelo outro. V - Nestas circunst?ncias, a compensa??o da atribui??o patrimonial por parte da autora cuja causa jur?dica se extinguiu pela dissolu??o do casamento ? pass?vel de poder ser tutelada pelo instituto do enriquecimento sem causa.","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"1 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0430"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/","name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-24T12:51:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-351-20-8t8orm-e1-s1-2022-02-22\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 351\/20.8T8ORM.E1.S1 \u2013 2022-02-22"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/673035","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=673035"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=673035"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=673035"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=673035"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=673035"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=673035"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=673035"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=673035"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}