O caso Masterpiece Cakeshop, LTD.., et al. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission et al. e sua contribuição hermenêutica ao art. 39, II e IX, do código consumerista brasileiro: prática abusiva ou recusa lícita?

Abstract

It is possible to refuse service to the demand, the sale of goods or the provision of services to the consumer, under the terms of art. 39, II and IX of the CDC, without setting up abu-sive practice? To satisfy this problem, we first analyze the factual and legal premises of the case Masterpiece Cakeshop, LTD., Et. al., v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission et. al. Next, we do a hermeneutic description of art. 39, II and IX, of the Consumer Defense Code, in order to understand its protective scope. The objective is to demonstrate, with support in the case study in question, the existence of certain factual and legal situations capable of authorizing the refusal of the supplier of products or services to specific consumer demands. The construction of this reasoning is anchored in the methods of integrative research, hermeneutic-concretizing, and in the techniques of case study and bibliographic research. In the end, it concludes by the recognition of the lawfulness and the inap-plicability of art. 39, II and IX, of the Consumer Protection Code, in certain justifiable legal and factual situations.