Citas bibligráficas
Garrido, M., Reyes, V. (2025). La tutela de terceros frente al Laudo Arbitral y el Amparo como Garantía [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/683874
Garrido, M., Reyes, V. La tutela de terceros frente al Laudo Arbitral y el Amparo como Garantía [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2025. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/683874
@misc{renati/1053510,
title = "La tutela de terceros frente al Laudo Arbitral y el Amparo como Garantía",
author = "Reyes Aliaga, Vania Alejandra",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2025"
}
This project focuses on the ruling of the Constitutional Court in Case No. 02724-2021-PA/TC, which deals with the constitutional appeal filed by the Supervisory Body for Investment in Transport Infrastructure for Public Use (OSITRAN) against the decision of 3 June 2021 issued by the Second Constitutional Chamber of the Lima High Court of Justice, which declared the application for amparo inadmissible. The ruling considered the appeal to be inadmissible, since the appeal is only admissible when the award has been totally or partially annulled, a situation that would not be warranted in the present case. However, this ruling of the Constitutional Court does not cease to create controversy, as it has not achieved a unitary vote to declare the amparo claim inadmissible, but instead, some judges consider that it should have been declared unfounded but not inadmissible, and even the so-called ‘María Julia Precedent’ is brought to precedence, which provides as a general rule that the appeal for annulment is the specific way to question an arbitration award, and therefore the amparo against the award would be inadmissible.
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons