On March 9, 2026, the National Council of Justice (CNJ) published Provision No. 2016, which establishes guidelines to be observed by magistrates in judicial reorganization and bankruptcy proceedings involving rural producers.

The guidelines were drawn up by a Special Technical Commission established just under a year ago within the scope of the National Forum for Business Reorganization and Bankruptcy (FONAREF) with the purpose of discussing and proposing measures to improve the performance of the Judiciary in judicial reorganization and bankruptcy proceedings involving rural producers.

The CNJ provision: (i) compiles the rules already provided for in current legislation, in many cases even reproducing the rules verbatim; (ii) indicates how certain rules should be interpreted and applied by judges, especially in relation to matters currently controversial in case law and legal practice; and (iii) establishes additional measures to be adopted by the judicial administrator in supervising the activities of rural producers, which go beyond those already provided for by law.

With regard to the compilation of rules applicable to the judicial reorganization of rural producers, Provision No. 2016 ratifies:

• The objective and subjective requirements for a rural producer’s request for judicial reorganization (Articles 2 to 5);
• The obligation for all rural producers to individually submit the mandatory documentation provided for in Article 51 of Law 11,101/2005 (including documents proving rural activity), even if they have filed for judicial reorganization under procedural consolidation (Article 6);
• The jurisdiction of the judicial reorganization court to decide which credits are subject to judicial reorganization (Article 11, paragraph 2) and on the possibility of preventing the withdrawal of capital assets essential to the judicial reorganization of the rural producer’s establishment during the stay period (Article 11);
• The guarantees offered by rural producers in favor of third parties are not subject to judicial reorganization (Article 13, sole paragraph);
  Which credits are subject (Article 13) and not subject (Article 15) to judicial reorganization.

There are several relevant guidelines regarding the interpretation of the legislation. Many of them accept the legal arguments defended by FLH Advogados:

• Credit rights, intangible assets, and the proceeds of business activities CANNOT be considered capital assets essential to the judicial reorganization of rural producers for the purposes of shielding the debtor’s assets as provided for in the final part of art. 49, §3, of Law 11,101/2005 (art. 11, §1);
• The jurisdiction of the court hearing the judicial reorganization case to prevent the seizure of capital assets essential to the judicial reorganization is temporary and restricted to the stay period (Article 11, paragraph 3);
• There is automatic subrogation of the agricultural pledge on the following harvest, operating immediately and independently of any court decision (Art. 16, §§1 and 2);
• Judicial reorganization as a rural producer is restricted to those who actually personally engage in rural activities. Landowners who lease their property to third parties without personally engaging in rural activities are excluded (Art. 10, §2);
• Credits from cooperative acts involving credit operations are subject to judicial reorganization, which may significantly affect rural credit cooperatives, such as SICREDI and SICOOB (Art. 15, IV);
• With the initial petition for judicial reorganization, the rural producer must submit a report that provides an overview of the general conditions of their rural activity, including a statement of all guarantees constituted on present or future harvests (Art. 8, sole paragraph).

Regarding supervision by the judicial administrator, the main additional measures created by Provision No. 2016 were:

• The expert conducting the preliminary assessment must report whether there are any forward purchase contracts for agricultural production, whether there are any guarantees on agricultural production or related assets (Article 10, Paragraph 5), as well as report any evidence of misappropriation of guarantees (Article 10, Paragraph 7);
• The judicial administrator must include, in the Monthly Activity Reports (RMA), a specific section on rural activity, with monitoring of the production cycle and information on agricultural production (Art. 12, caput, and §2).

These CNJ guidelines are intended to guide magistrates, especially in districts without courts specializing in judicial reorganization, in conducting judicial reorganizations and bankruptcies of rural producers, but they are not binding, so it will be necessary to monitor, in practice, the adherence of magistrates.

However, we believe that the CNJ’s initiative is an important step forward in the attempt to standardize the interpretation of the legislation applicable to judicial reorganizations of rural producers and to provide greater legal certainty to Brazilian agribusiness.

The litigation and agribusiness team at FLH Advogados is available to answer any questions on the subject.