Company: BBD
Filing Date: 2025-05-30
Form Type: 6-K
Source: 0001292814-25-002283
Chunk: 135

Company: BANK BRADESCO
Filing Date: 2025-05-30
Form: 6-K
Chunk 135
---
ising from judgment of the court of last resort) and those that were in the investigative
phase.

| 113 – Reference Form – 2024 |

| 4. Risk factors |

The
judgment of paradigm cases began in November 2013 but was interrupted without any pronouncement on the merits of the subject under discussion
by their Ministers. According to the associations representing the savings account holders, banks misapplied the inflation adjustments
when those economic plans were implemented, and should be required to indemnify the savings account holders for the non-adjustment of
those amounts.

The STF decided that the ruling of common class actions proposed by associations, as a procedural representative, questioning inflationary readjustments only benefits consumers who: (i) were associated with the associations at the time of filing of the common class actions; and (ii) authorized the filing of the common class actions. This reduced the number of beneficiaries in common class actions because, until then, it was understood that these decisions should benefit all consumers affected by the practices(i.e. whoever suffered
losses related to inflationary adjustments, regardless of the losses of savings beneficiaries being associated to the association that
filed the class action).

In parallel,
the STJ also analyzes class actions related to inflationary purges. In May 2014, the STJ decided that the starting date for counting default
interest for compensating savings account holders must be the date of summons of the public civil action (rather than the date of settlement
of the judgment), therefore increasing the amount of possible losses for the affected banks in the event of an unfavorable decision by
the STF.

In May
2015, the STJ decided that “In the individual execution of a ruling given in a citizen suit that recognizes the right of savers
to inflationary purges arising from the Verão Plan (January 1989), there should be no inclusion of remuneratory interest
in settlement calculations if there is no expressed conviction, without prejudice to, where appropriate, the interested party adjudicates
individual execution proceedings”, potentially reducing the exposure of the Banks. However, in 2021, the STJ decided that “The
beneficiary of inflationary purges can promote the individual fulfillment of a collective decision for the exclusive collection of remuneratory
interest not included in a diverse citizen suit, also subject to individual execution by the same beneficiary”.

In December
2017, with the mediation of the Executive branch’s attorney (Advocacia Geral da União or AG