Search

Planeta do Futebol reported that, after an unfavorable court decision, the Fla-Flu Consortium asked the court to reject a new appeal from Vasco regarding ticket sales for the match against Boca Juniors. The concessionaire stated that the club should assume the risks of having sold tickets while the injunction could still be suspended. The Consortium argued that the appeal had lost its object due to the proximity of the deadline and that it repeated already rejected arguments. It advocated for the match to be held at Nilton Santos Stadium and stated that there would still be time to reorganize the event. According to the publication, Vasco urgently requested reconsideration of the suspension and claimed that it had begun sales for Maracanã after receiving court authorization. The club argued that the capacity of Nilton Santos, which is 44,661 people, was less than the 46,014 tickets sold, which would require cancellations and refunds. It also pointed out the need to accommodate 4,000 visiting fans and maintain separation areas between the supporters. The appeal from Vasco and the statement from the Fla-Flu Consortium were awaiting analysis from Judge Suely Lopes Magalhães, reported Planeta do Futebol, based on ESPN Brazil. #Vasco #Maracanã #Futebol (translated)

The Planet of Football reported that a decision by Judge Suely Lopes Magalhães suspended the injunction that required the Fla-Flu Consortium to release Maracanã for Vasco vs. Boca Juniors, for the semifinal of the South American Cup. According to the publication, the legal dispute continued. The judge reportedly understood that Marco Antônio Ibrahim could not alone review the decision of the rapporteur Alexandre de Carvalho Mesquita and that the appeal should be analyzed by the rapporteur himself or by a panel. She also reportedly pointed out the risk of having three rival fan bases in the same area, as Flamengo vs. Botafogo, for basketball, would be held that evening at Maracanãzinho. According to the report, Suely cited a report from BEPE that deemed Nilton Santos suitable to host the match and stated that the police's preference for Maracanã did not make its use indispensable for safety. The decision, the publication added, did not determine whether Vasco had the right to the stadium nor whether the consortium's refusal was legitimate. The writ of security would be forwarded to rapporteur Joaquim Domingos de Almeida Neto, and the decision would be submitted to the Special Body of TJ-RJ. The publication attributed the information to the newspaper O Globo. #Maracanã #Vasco #Justiça (translated)

The Planeta do Futebol profile reported that the Fla-Flu Consortium appealed to the president of the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro to try to reverse the decision that authorized Vasco x Boca Juniors at Maracanã. According to the profile, the consortium filed a writ of security and requested an urgent measure while the appeal was being analyzed. The consortium stated it had authorized six requests from Vasco since the start of the concession, including classics against Flamengo and Fluminense. The authorization for the match with Boca Juniors would remain valid, unless the court accepted the request, the profile added, citing O Globo Esportes and Diogo Dantas. #Vasco #BocaJuniors #Futebol (translated)

Gustavo Tutinha reported that Judge Marco Antônio Ibrahim, from the 23rd Chamber of Private Law of the TJRJ, ordered the match between Vasco and Boca Juniors to be held at Maracanã and took into account the history of conflicts between Vasco and the concessionaire Fla-Flu Serviços S.A. Tutinha stated that the magistrate pointed out that the club had already sought justice to use the stadium and that the concessionaire had repeated justifications related to the condition of the pitch, which could indicate a "personal issue" between the parties. According to Tutinha, Ibrahim also considered a Memorandum of Understanding between Vasco and the concessionaire. The club argued that the document guaranteed it four matches per season at Maracanã, excluding classics against Flamengo and Fluminense, and that any refusals should be based on objective technical and operational criteria. Tutinha added that Vasco pointed out a contradiction in how the concessionaire invoked the memorandum to restrict access but contested its binding force when it provided rights to the club. Ibrahim considered the document in his reasoning but did not make a definitive decision on the enforceability of all clauses. #Vasco #Maracanã #Justiça (translated)

Planeta do Futebol reported that the Justice of Rio de Janeiro had accepted, on that day, an appeal from Vasco and ordered the Fla-Flu Consortium to release Maracanã for the semifinal of the South American Cup against Boca Juniors. According to the profile, the appellate judge considered public safety and the protection of fans to be more relevant than the issues regarding the pitch claimed by the consortium. The publication stated that the decision took into account favorable expressions from the Public Ministry and the Military Police, a memorandum between the parties regarding the use of the stadium by Vasco, and the deadline set by Conmebol, which would expire the following day. #Vasco #Maracanã #SulAmericana (translated)

Attention, Vascaínos! It was reported that Judge Marco Antônio Ibrahim, from the 23rd Chamber of Private Law of the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro, determined that the concessionaire Fla-Flu Serviços S.A. should make the Maracanã available for Vasco vs. Boca Juniors, for the semifinals of the Copa Sul-Americana, on October 20, at 9:30 PM. The decision was granted this Friday (9), after a request from Vasco against the concessionaire's refusal, which had alleged technical issues related to the maintenance and restoration of the field. According to the publication, the magistrate considered statements from the Military Police and the Public Ministry of Rio de Janeiro, which pointed out the stadium as a preferred alternative due to structural, logistical, and operational conditions, as well as issues of safety and urban mobility. He also mentioned previous disputes between the club and the concessionaire regarding the use of the stadium. The decision also determined that the Maracanã should be offered to Vasco under commercial and operational conditions equal to those practiced for Flamengo and Fluminense, respecting legal, technical, and safety requirements. The publication stated that compliance was urgent, as Vasco needed to inform CONMEBOL by October 10 which stadium would host the match, and that the concessionaire could still present its defense. #Maracanã #Vasco #SulAmericana (translated)

The Cruzmaltina Arena reported that the judge Marcos Antônio Ibrahim granted the requested preliminary injunction by Vasco and ordered the release of Maracanã for the match against Boca Juniors, in the semifinal of the Copa Sul-Americana. https://t.co/Vjv01XVmVe #Vasco #CopaSulAmericana #Maracanã (translated)

Gustavo Tutinha wrote that the judge Marco Antônio Ibrahim, president of the 23rd Chamber of Private Law of TJRJ, granted a preliminary injunction requested by Vasco and ordered the concessionaire Fla-Flu to make Maracanã available for the semifinal of the South American Cup on 10/20, between Vasco and Boca. According to Tutinha, the magistrate prioritized public safety over the conditions of the pitch, mentioned statements from the Military Police and the Public Prosecutor's Office, and stated that the history of conflicts between Vasco and the concessionaire seemed to indicate a "personal issue." The decision would also guarantee the club equal commercial and operational conditions to those of Flamengo and Fluminense, with immediate compliance, including by a court official on duty. #Vasco #Maracanã #SulAmericana (translated)

David Ágape identified Judge João Marcos Buch of the Santa Catarina Court of Justice (TJSC) as the author of a publication that, according to him, revived the 2018 rumor that Jair Bolsonaro would persecute gay people. Ágape stated that Bolsonaro did not persecute this group. The author also mentioned that Buch sentenced Professor Jonas Bressan to two years in prison and ordered him to pay R$ 10,000 for collective moral damages for a message forwarded in a WhatsApp group on the eve of the second round of elections in 2022. According to Ágape, the Civil Police had archived the investigation. Ágape further reported that in a Christmas letter sent to prisoners in 2021, Buch criticized inequalities and racism in Brazil and the Brazilian government. At the inauguration ceremony on March 7, 2025, the judge reportedly said that the country was flirting with fascism and publicly declared his love for his husband, Lucas Buch. According to Ágape, a year later, the Civil Police of Espírito Santo executed search and seizure warrants at Lucas's address in Florianópolis. He stated that the operation was authorized by the courts at the request of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Espírito Santo and was part of an investigation into fraud and embezzlement, with an estimated loss of R$ 3.5 million. According to the author, the records described the victim as elderly, vulnerable, and residing abroad. https://t.co/hbxC7B2HDF #Justiça #DireitosHumanos #Fascismo (translated)

The Planet of Football reported that a judge from Rio de Janeiro denied, on the 6th, an appeal from Vasco to play against Boca Juniors at the Maracanã. According to the publication, the decision could still be changed until Saturday, the deadline for the club to indicate the location to Conmebol. The judge reportedly considered a more in-depth analysis of the evidence regarding the pitch, the calendar, and the operation necessary, in addition to requesting a response from the Fla-Flu Consortium. Vasco claimed unequal treatment and selective application of criteria, according to the post. The publication added that the Public Ministry recommended the use of the Maracanã, but the judge considered the recommendation non-binding for the Fla-Flu Consortium and insufficient to replace the contractual, technical, and operational assessments. #Vasco #Maracanã #BocaJuniors (translated)

The Football Planet reported, citing ESPN Brazil, that the court denied a request from a Vasco fan to open Maracanã for the semifinal of the South American Cup against Boca Juniors. According to the profile, the judge understood that the action did not demonstrate discrimination, diversion of purpose, or harm to public interest. The profile added that the decision applied only to the fan's process. In another action, filed by Vasco against the Fla-Flu Consortium to try to play at the stadium, the court had ordered a 20-day suspension. The club appealed and requested an urgent decision, but, according to the Football Planet, the request had not yet been analyzed. #Vasco #Maracanã #SulAmericana (translated)

Gustavo Tutinha wrote that the judge Rose Marie Pimentel Martins, from the 5th Public Law Chamber, denied the urgent request presented by Vasco's partner Marcus Vinicius de Menezes Reis in a popular action. According to Tutinha, the magistrate recognized the urgency related to the proximity of the match between Vasco and Boca, but deemed the elements insufficient to grant the measure. He stated that the decision treated the popular action and the case filed by Vasco as distinct actions, with their own foundations and legal relations, and dismissed any potential connection or prevention between them. Tutinha added that the denial to the partner did not represent a defeat for the club nor did it mean that the right discussed by Vasco did not exist. In the publication, he also mentioned the profile Naosoujornal. #Vasco #Maracanã #Justiça (translated)

Gustavo Tutinha wrote that Vasco filed an appeal on Friday (02) at the TJRJ against the decision of the 2nd Civil Court that did not analyze its urgent request to use Maracanã against Boca Juniors and suspended the process for 20 days, after a statement from Fla-Flu Serviços in 48 hours. According to Tutinha, Vasco argued that it needs to indicate the stadium to CONMEBOL by 10/05 for the match on 10/20 at 21:30, and that the suspension could make a subsequent decision pointless. The club requested that Judge Rose Marie Pimentel Martins, from the 5th Chamber of Public Law, grant the request directly for Maracanã to be made available. As an alternative, it requested the end of the suspension and that the first-instance judge analyze the preliminary injunction without waiting for the appeal related to the popular action. Tutinha reported that Vasco also contested the technical criteria used to deny the stadium and claimed a contradiction in the concessionaire's position on the Memorandum of Understanding signed by Vasco, Flamengo, and Fluminense. The club stated that the restrictions should be applied in a non-discriminatory manner and cited ten official matches held at Maracanã in May 2026, nine of them between the 9th and 30th, including games on consecutive days: Fluminense x Bolívar on 05/19, and Flamengo x Estudiantes on 05/20; Flamengo x Cusco on 05/26, and Fluminense x Deportivo La Guaira on 05/27. According to Tutinha, Vasco also mentioned the indication of Maracanã by PMERJ as the most suitable option for security planning. Among the requests, it included non-discriminatory commercial and operational conditions, a maximum ticket load according to the authorized capacity, and a daily fine of R$ 1 million in case of non-compliance. #Vasco #Maracanã #Futebol (translated)

🚨 VASCO CONTESTS TECHNICAL CRITERIA OF FLA-FLU, POINTS OUT VIOLATION OF CONCESSION RULES AND CITES DECISION FROM TJRJ IN ACTION FOR MARACANÃ Vasco filed an obligation lawsuit on Wednesday (1st) with a request for urgent protective measures to try to secure the Maracanã against Boca Juniors on October 20, for the semifinal of the South American Cup. In the action, the club directly questions the technical criteria used by Fla-Flu to deny the stadium, points out unequal treatment, supports violations of concession rules, and also explores a contradiction involving the Memorandum of Understanding. 📌 WHAT FLA-FLU ALLEGED In response to Vasco, the concessionaire pointed to the accumulated wear of the lawn, the climatic conditions of July and August, and the need to preserve the intervals designated for field maintenance. For 10/20, Fla-Flu specifically mentioned games of Fluminense on 10/18 and Flamengo on 10/22. With Vasco x Boca between these matches, there would be three games in five days. According to the concessionaire, this sequence would prevent procedures such as helical mowing, targeted fertilization, supplemental lighting, and repair of damage to the lawn. 📌 VASCO QUESTIONS THE TECHNICAL JUSTIFICATION The first counterpoint is the lawn itself. Vasco highlights that, three days after the denial, it was announced that the existing field would be removed and new Bermuda Celebration rolls would be placed, with the return of football scheduled for 10/08. Vasco x Boca will be on 10/20. The club's thesis is that it would not be possible to use the accumulated wear of the old lawn as justification for a match that will take place 12 days after the return of football to the renewed field. 📌 GREENLEAF DOCUMENT IS USED BY VASCO Vasco also retrieves the technical planning prepared by Greenleaf, the company responsible for lawn maintenance, in August. According to the action, the document shows that the same procedures cited by Fla-Flu to deny Vasco x Boca have already been carried out in a concentrated manner between matches. The petition states that helical mowing, targeted fertilization, supplemental lighting, and damage repair have even been grouped in a single day after a match, even in a winter scenario and lawn wear. The question posed by Vasco is direct: if this work could be done in August to accommodate the sequence of games from Flamengo and Fluminense, why couldn't it be repeated in October, after the complete lawn replacement? 📌 INTERVAL BETWEEN GAMES Vasco also contests the argument of three games in five days by comparing the situation with the recent calendar of the Maracanã. The action argues that sequences with reduced intervals for Flamengo and Fluminense matches have already been admitted. For Vasco, if the necessary interval for lawn recovery is decisive for denying a match, that criterion must be applied equally to all clubs. 📌 SHOWS AND OTHER EVENTS The action also points out that the Maracanã hosts shows, religious gatherings, and events from other sports, including the installation of structures and occupancy of the field area. Vasco questions how the administration can reconcile these events with lawn preservation, yet considers it technically unfeasible to host a semifinal of CONMEBOL. According to the data presented in the action, at least seven extraordinary events unrelated to official football were held between 2025 and 09/30/2026. 📌 CONCESSION NOTICE Vasco cites item 3.4 of the Terms of Reference, which gives priority to football events from the official calendars of FIFA, CONMEBOL, CBF, and FERJ over other events. Vasco x Boca is an official semifinal of CONMEBOL. The action argues that there would be an "inversion of this priority" by accommodating shows and other events and denying the stadium for a match that, under the concession rules cited by the club, should have priority. The petition mentions "distortion of the concessionaire's obligations" and "violation of the equal treatment required by the Concession Notice." 📌 UNEQUAL TREATMENT Vasco summarizes its challenge in four points: • the lawn replacement would change the premise of accumulated wear; • Greenleaf's own planning would demonstrate that maintenance could be carried out between matches; • the calendar would show reduced intervals that have already been admitted for Flamengo and Fluminense; • other events are reconciled with the necessary care for field preservation. As a result, Vasco asserts that restrictions are being applied selectively. The action further cites clause 13.2 of the Concession Contract, which prohibits favoritism and unjustifiably different, discriminatory treatment, or "without technical criteria" that results in restricted access to the Complex. 📌 THE CONTRADICTION POINTED OUT BY VASCO Fla-Flu claims not to recognize the validity of the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2025. At the same time, according to Vasco, it uses the document itself—especially the provision for four matches conditioned on availability and operational conditions—to justify the denial. Vasco points out contradictory behavior and invokes the principle of good faith. 📌 PREVIOUS DECISION OF TJRJ The action also cites the Instrument Appeal No. 3023517-70.2026.8.19.0000. On that occasion, Justice Alexandre Freitas Câmara analyzed the discussion regarding the absence of Fla-Flu's signature on the Memorandum. The magistrate stated that Flamengo and Fluminense, members of the concessionaire, had signed the document and pointed out that disregarding it later could represent contradictory behavior contrary to good faith. 📌 RECOMMENDATION FROM BEPE The issue of public safety also appears as an argument for the use of the Maracanã. According to the action, BEPE (Specialized Battalion for Policing in Stadiums) recommended holding the match at the Maracanã due to the magnitude of the confrontation and the expected public turnout. Vasco uses this recommendation to argue that the Maracanã is not just a preference of the club. The petition points to the stadium as the option that best meets capacity, location, structure, security, and operational conditions to host the match against Boca. 📌 SÃO JANUÁRIO IS NOT AN OPTION Vasco also differentiates the situation from the previous process involving Vasco x Vitória, when it did not obtain a preliminary injunction to use the Maracanã. This time, according to the action, São Januário cannot host the semifinal. The South American Manual requires a minimum capacity of 30,000 spectators starting from the semifinals, while the petition indicates São Januário has approximately 21,880 seats. Vasco acknowledges the Nilton Santos Stadium as an alternative but argues that having another stadium does not resolve the issue brought to Justice: is there legitimate technical and contractual basis for Fla-Flu to deny Maracanã? 📌 WHAT VASCO SEEKS Vasco is seeking a preliminary injunction requiring Fla-Flu to make the Maracanã available for Vasco x Boca on 10/20 at 9:30 PM. The request includes the maximum ticket allocation corresponding to the authorized capacity, the use of necessary facilities for organizing the match, the implementation of a mosaic, and temporary installation of banners in the same manner allowed for the clubs that are members of the concessionaire. In case of non-compliance, Vasco requests a daily fine of R$ 1 million. Vasco must inform CONMEBOL by October 5 where it will hold the return match of the semifinal. #Vasco #Maracanã #Futebol (translated)

ATENÇÃO: CNJ conduz operação contra o desembargador Newton Ramos, do TRF-1. Ele e a esposa são apontados em mensagens encontradas no celular de Vorcaro como integrantes da "turma do KN (Kássio Nunes)". A esposa de Newston, advogada, teria contrato de r$ 427 milhões com o Master. #Justiça #CNJ #Corrupção

Exclusivo: advogada Camilla Ramos procurou Jorge Messias, da AGU, para propor um acordo que poderia salvar o Master. E ouviu um "não". A reunião foi no mesmo dia que Paulo Henrique Costa disse a um interlocutor que o Master poderia quebrar a qualquer momento. Acordo envolvia os cerca de R$ 10 bilhões em precatorios do setor sucro que o Master tem. Banco propunha que a União pagasse um valor com desagio e encerrasse a discussão. Desesperado por liquidez, Master tinha um caminho mais rapido por $$ na mão. Reunião foi pedida e realizada por Camilla Ramos, esposa do desembargador Newton Ramos, o pessoal da "Turma do KN", que deu voto decisivo para uma vitória nesse caso no Supremo. https://t.co/QdQB2JzCOq #Master #Acordo #Justiça

Advogado é contratado para atuar juridicamente em processos nos tribunais, redigir petições, recursos e defesas, participar de audiências, realizar sustentações orais, orientar clientes. Lobista com diploma de advogado é contratado para conseguir reuniões com presidentes e magistrados, abrir janelas de WhatsApp com desembargadores e ministros, dar carona em aviões e helicópteros, e garantir que seus familiares no sistema de Justiça atuem formal e informalmente a favor de seus clientes. As entidades do mundo jurídico deveriam combater, interna e externamente, esse desvirtuamento da profissão e o tráfico de influência decorrente dele, que ajuda a corromper a República. #Advocacia #ÉticaProfissional #Corrupção

INFORMAÇÃO URGENTE: Hoje às 15:43 o desembargador Cesar Cury acatou o pedido da 777 e das recuperandas, e retirou o julgamentos dos agravos no dia 24/9 face à composição amigável. Agora aguarda-se a homologação da desistência fos processos pela Juiza Simone Chevran. https://t.co/gwy0jOOyPS #Justiça #Informação #Urgente