Algumas reflexões sobre o conceito de “erro grosseiro” (art. 28 da LINDB) a partir da jurisprudência do STF sobre a responsabilidade do advogado público

Law No. 13,655/2018 has included in Decree-Law No. 4,657/1942 (LINDB) the provision of Article 28, according to which “the public agent will be personally liable for their decisions or technical opinions in the case of intent or gross error”. Recently, the Supreme Federal Court – “STF” ruled on ADI No. 6,421/DF. Among the objects of the ADI it was the request for a declaration of unconstitutionality of the aforementioned provision. In this context, the present article aims to identify possible points of support in the STF’s jurisprudence for understanding the real scope of the legislative change promoted by Law No. 13,655/2018, notably in view of an apparent approximation of the general regime of personal liability of administrators to the specific regime jurisprudentially constructed for the hypothesis of technical-legal opinions. In order to do so, the article analyzes STF’s rulings on the subject, aiming to understand the practical meaning of the jurisprudential evolution. It is found that, just as the legislator did in relation to the public administrator when approving Law No. 13,655/2018, the STF, based on the constitutional guarantee of the lawyer’s inviolability, has opted to ensure the latter, in the exercise of their advisory activity, considerable freedom to express their technical opinion, even when contrary to the understanding of the control bodies.