Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Bautista, L., (2022). Informe Jurídico de la Resolución N° 0219-2018/SPC- INDECOPI [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/22986
Bautista, L., Informe Jurídico de la Resolución N° 0219-2018/SPC- INDECOPI []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2022. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/22986
@misc{renati/10631,
title = "Informe Jurídico de la Resolución N° 0219-2018/SPC- INDECOPI",
author = "Bautista Huarancca, Luis Gustavo",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2022"
}
Title: Informe Jurídico de la Resolución N° 0219-2018/SPC- INDECOPI
Authors(s): Bautista Huarancca, Luis Gustavo
Advisor(s): Solórzano Solórzano, Raúl Roy
OCDE field: https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01
Issue Date: 8-Aug-2022
Institution: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract: El presente informe tiene por objeto analizar el contenido de la Resolución No 0219-2018/SPC-
INDECOPI, mediante la cual la Sala Especializada en Protección al Consumidor concluyó que
la restricción de ingresar a las salas de cine con alimentos y/o bebidas adquiridas en
establecimientos comerciales diferentes al de Cineplex S.A. constituye un supuesto de cláusula
abusiva de ineficacia absoluta que vulnera el derecho a la libre elección de los consumidores.
En ese sentido, este trabajo evalúa la cuestión referida a si dicha restricción constituye, en
efecto, una cláusula abusiva que vulnera el derecho a elegir de los consumidores y si, amparada
en el derecho a la libertad de empresa, es una restricción legítimamente válida en el contexto
de una modelo de economía social de mercado, en el cual se encuentra adscrito el Perú. Para
este propósito, se analiza el contenido esencial y los alcances del derecho a la libertad de
empresa y el derecho de protección de los consumidores. Asimismo, se examina si la restricción
puede calificarse como una cláusula abusiva en atención a lo dispuesto en la legislación
nacional. Finalmente, desde un enfoque de los contornos constitucionales de los derechos
involucrados, se efectúa un el test de proporcionalidad sobre la medida correctiva ordenada.
Todo ello para efectos de evidenciar que, bajo la interpretación del Indecopi en la resolución
materia de análisis, el mandato constitucional del derecho a la libertad de empresa se restringió
sin un debido sustento, en tanto la cláusula de restricción de acceso a las salas de cine con
alimentos y/o bebidas adquiridas fuera del establecimiento comercial no representa una
restricción al derecho a la libre elección de los consumidores.
The purpose of this report is to analyze the content of the Resolution N° 0219-2018/SPC- INDECOPI, by which the Sala Especializada en Protección al Consumidor concluded that the restriction of entering movie theaters with food and/or beverages purchased in commercial establishments other than Cineplex S.A. constitutes a case of unfair term of absolute ineffectiveness that infringes the right of free choice of consumers. In this sense, this paper evaluates the question of whether such restriction constitutes, in effect, an unfair term that infringes the right to choose of consumers and whether, protected by the right to freedom of enterprise, it is a legitimately valid restriction in the context of a model of social market economy, in which Perú belongs. For this purpose, the essential content and scope of the right to free enterprise and the right to consumer protection are analyzed. Likewise, it is examined whether the restriction can be classified as an unfair term in accordance with the provisions of national legislation. Finally, from an approach of the constitutional contours of the rights involved, a proportionality test is carried out on the corrective measure ordered. All this for the purposes of evidencing that, under the interpretation of the Indecopi in the resolution subject to analysis, the constitutional mandate of the right to freedom of enterprise was restricted without due support, since the term restricting access to movie theaters with food and/or beverages purchased outside the commercial establishment does not represent a restriction on the right to free choice of consumers.
The purpose of this report is to analyze the content of the Resolution N° 0219-2018/SPC- INDECOPI, by which the Sala Especializada en Protección al Consumidor concluded that the restriction of entering movie theaters with food and/or beverages purchased in commercial establishments other than Cineplex S.A. constitutes a case of unfair term of absolute ineffectiveness that infringes the right of free choice of consumers. In this sense, this paper evaluates the question of whether such restriction constitutes, in effect, an unfair term that infringes the right to choose of consumers and whether, protected by the right to freedom of enterprise, it is a legitimately valid restriction in the context of a model of social market economy, in which Perú belongs. For this purpose, the essential content and scope of the right to free enterprise and the right to consumer protection are analyzed. Likewise, it is examined whether the restriction can be classified as an unfair term in accordance with the provisions of national legislation. Finally, from an approach of the constitutional contours of the rights involved, a proportionality test is carried out on the corrective measure ordered. All this for the purposes of evidencing that, under the interpretation of the Indecopi in the resolution subject to analysis, the constitutional mandate of the right to freedom of enterprise was restricted without due support, since the term restricting access to movie theaters with food and/or beverages purchased outside the commercial establishment does not represent a restriction on the right to free choice of consumers.
Link to repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/22986
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Derecho.
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Solórzano Solórzano, Raúl Roy; Bardales Mendoza, Enrique; Ledesma Orbegozo, Wendy
Register date: 8-Aug-2022
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.