On social networks, the musician said that Théo, 11 years old, was prohibited last week
Summary
Lucas Lima reported that his son was prevented from remaining at the reception of a gym due to an internal rule, although there is no law that prohibits him; Experts explain that private rules are allowed if previously communicated and justified for safety.
The 42 -year -old musician Lucas Lima used social networks to report an unusual situation. According to him, his son Theo, 11 years old, was not allowed to remain in any environment of a network of gyms frequented by the artist. Is Sandy’s ex -husband wrong or the law in his favor?
Receive the main news directly on WhatsApp! Sign up for the Earth channel
In a video published on his Instagram profile, he said he went to the usual gym, accompanied by the boy. The intention was to let him wait during training. “I got there [e falei]: “Puppy, sit there, read your little book that the father needs to train,” he said.
On the scene, he received a negative from employees, who reported that “the child could not train”. Lima explained that Theo would not train, just wait for the reception. “No, you can’t. You can’t stay at the reception. It’s a law,” he would have heard in response. Without wanting to cause greater stress, Lucas claims to have renounced the discussion for not being misunderstanding to be famous.
At home, he studied and discovered that there is no law with this requirement and that restriction would actually be a rule of that network of gyms. “I was surprised, because it’s not that I can’t enter, I can’t stay at the reception. I found it strange, but we accept,” he said.
“That is, if you have a child, on vacation, it cannot be fitness. If you don’t have a support network, it’s over, brother!
What does the law say?
TO EarthThe lawyer specialized in family law and successions and partners of the Paiva & André Vanessa Paiva law firm confirmed that there is really no federal or state law that forbids the entry or permanence of children into gyms, even if accompanied by a guardian.
“The statute of children and adolescents brings rules limited to stadiums, discos, cinema, parties, etc., places of public or entertainment and requires that any restriction is proven on a case by chance by decision of the court,” he explains.
The expert has exemplified that, in some cases, such as ordinance no. 06/2011 of the first district of the Court of Pernambuco, the formal authorization of the parents, the specific registration, the medical opinion and the school declaration for the permanence of children or adolescents in the gyms, collecting classes, struggles, martial arts or sports clubs in this state. “But it is limited to that place,” he said.
Paiva also stressed that children have the right to the coexistence of the community and the legal guardian has the right to accompany them. However, this does not protect them from risk situations or real danger. “Bodybuilding academies involve the circulation of heavy equipment and risks for accidents. In this context, the restriction can be legitimate and justifiable due to safety,” he says.
In the case of the rule established by the Academy, the lawyer clarifies that a private establishment can adopt internal access rules, including prohibiting the entry or permanence of minors, provided that some conditions are respected.
“These rules must be previously informed clearly, by contract, internal regulation or visible notice, as required by the consumer protection code. If the restriction aims to prevent accidents and accidents of responsibility and is communicated with transparency, it is considered lawful and reasonable”, says Paiva.
What can managers do in these cases?
“Formally ask the written rule, requesting a copy of the regulation or the contract that contains it, in addition to checking whether there is a notice on the site or on the spot. If the standard was not previously informed and the embarrassment or negative has not been unjustified, record a complaint about procon for the illegal practice (art. 39 of the CDC) and also in complaints here,” says Vanessa Paiva.
If the rights of the minor to coexistence are violated, with improper exposure or moral damages to the managers, it is possible to seek judicial repairs, according to the lawyer. “If the restriction is based on real security, a well -formulated and communicated justification avoids abuse,” he concludes.
Source: Terra
Ben Stock is a lifestyle journalist and author at Gossipify. He writes about topics such as health, wellness, travel, food and home decor. He provides practical advice and inspiration to improve well-being, keeps readers up to date with latest lifestyle news and trends, known for his engaging writing style, in-depth analysis and unique perspectives.
