Larissa Manoela’s parents only reinforce the arbitrary conduct denounced by the actress; says advisory

Larissa Manoela’s legal consultancy has released a press release commenting on it Silvana AND gilbertthe parents of the actress put their daughter’s villa, located in Rio de Janeiro, up for sale, without having consulted her.

According to the statement, the act only reinforces the accusations already made by the actress herself, in an interview with Fantástico this Sunday, and, therefore, “there is nothing extraordinary about it.” The property in question belonged to the Trelissa company, in which the parents and the actress had equal percentages.

“The new episode brought to the public of the listing for sale of the house in the condominium of Novo Leblon by the parents of Larissa Manoela integrates another chapter of what we have said, namely that they arbitrarily make decisions on the sale and purchase of real estate properties without consulting , until then, also the owner who is the couple’s daughter and has taken care, with her work, of raising funds for their purchase”, reads the note.

It’s the second time Silvana AND gilbert they are accused of selling their daughter’s property without her consent. In the first allegation, the actress’ parents said in an open letter that they would never do “anything immoral.”

In the same note, the actress’s legal advice explained it Larisa “was obligated” to notify her parents of her exit from the business and the handing over of her assets to her parents, since gilbert AND Silvanarepresented by their lawyers, have not yet signed the draft amendment to the companies’ contracts, which would hand over all of the plaintiff’s assets to them.

Although the ‘termination’ has not yet been carried out by the parents, the sale of Larissa Manoela’s villa without her consent does not constitute “automatically, a tort subject to judicial challenge”, as explained by the specialist in family law, Stefano Ribeiro Irons.

According to the lawyer, Larissa has the right to leave the company without the need for approval or consent from the shareholders, thus being able to withdraw from the company upon notice 60 days in advance. In this way the decision to sell the property, since this is not the object of the company, can be decided by the majority of the shareholders.

Source: Terra