Ordinary courts should not judge drug cases outside the SUS list

The Union must be the defendant in the process of requesting medical treatments that are not included in established public policies, since federal entities have joint responsibility in the provision of services in the health area, which authorizes them to be sued, individually or jointly, by the interested party. This was the understanding of the 1st Specialized Civil Chamber of the Court of Justice of Paraíba when annulling the previous sentence that determined the supply of the drug Temodal (temozolomide).

The common justice should not judge drug lawsuits outside the SUS list
Brazil Archive/Agency

The appeal was filed by the state of Paraíba in order to annul the judgment of the 3rd Court of the Public Treasury of Campina Grande (PB). When analyzing the records, Judge José Ricardo Porto noted that “the Federal Government must necessarily be the defendant in the dispute, as the postulated drug, Temodal (temozolomide), although registered with the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), is not is standardized in public policies made available by the Unified Health System,” he said.

According to the magistrate, the drug in question is used for cancer treatment, that is, of high complexity, which is why it is up to the Union to fund it, in the exact terms of Articles 3 to 5 of Ordinance No. 1.554/2013, which provides for the financing and execution rules of the Specialized Component of Pharmaceutical Assistance in the scope of the Unified Health System (SUS).

Porto also highlighted that the Federal Supreme Court has consolidated jurisprudence, including established in general repercussion, in the sense that the federative entities have joint responsibility in the provision of services in the health area, which authorizes them to be sued, individually or jointly, by the interested party.

“This prerogative of indication of the defendant’s pole granted to the jurisdiction must be weighed by the judge, who will be responsible, based on the governing rules, to determine the inclusion in the demand of the entity legally responsible for financing the main obligation, even if this means a shift in competence “he concluded. With information from the TJ-PB press office.

0804808-91.2018.8.15.0001