Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Cortez, M., (2024). Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución No. 00026-2020- TSC/OSIPTEL [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28401
Cortez, M., Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución No. 00026-2020- TSC/OSIPTEL []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28401
@misc{renati/11015,
title = "Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución No. 00026-2020- TSC/OSIPTEL",
author = "Cortez Medina, Maria Julia",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2024"
}
Title: Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución No. 00026-2020- TSC/OSIPTEL
Authors(s): Cortez Medina, Maria Julia
Advisor(s): Tassano Velaochaga, Hebert Eduardo
Keywords: Arbitraje comercial--Perú; Contratos de concesión--Perú; Telecomunicaciones--Regulación--Perú
OCDE field: https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01
Issue Date: 1-Aug-2024
Institution: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract: El presente informe jurídico se centra en el análisis de la Resolución del Tribunal
de Solución de Controversias No. 00026-2020-TSC/OSIPTEL con respecto a la
controversia suscitada entre Azteca Comunicaciones Perú S.A.C. y Enel
Distribución Perú S.A.A. relacionada al acceso y uso compartido de
infraestructura eléctrica. La disputa principal versa en el reclamación interpuesta
por Azteca contra ENEL en relación a la interpretación de las cláusulas de
compensación por la compartición de infraestructura y en la determinación de la
entidad competente para resolver la controversia, ya sea mediante arbitraje o a
través del organismo regulador OSIPTEL.
El estudio examina las resoluciones de OSIPTEL, las obligaciones impuestas a
ENEL, y las facultades del regulador para garantizar el cumplimiento de las
normativas, incluyendo la imposición de sanciones y multas coercitivas. Además,
se analizan las implicancias de las acciones u omisiones que afectan el mercado
de los servicios de telecomunicaciones y el rol de OSIPTEL en la resolución de
tales conflictos.
De esta forma, a lo largo de la investigación se han identificado los tres
problemas jurídicos. En primer lugar, se analizará si es materia de arbitraje la
contrprestación presente en el Contrato de Compartición. En segundo lugar, se
determinará si el OSIPTEL tiene competencia para exigir a ENEL la devolución
del monto pagado en exceso. Finalmente, se analizará la capacidad
sancionadora de regulador para hacer cumplir sus obligaciones.
The present legal report focuses on the analysis of Resolution No. 00026-2020- TSC/OSIPTEL issued by the Tribunal for the Resolution of Disputes in relation to the dispute between Azteca Comunicaciones Perú S.A.C. and Enel Distribution Perú S.A.A. concerning access to and shared use of electrical infrastructure. The main dispute revolves around Azteca's claim against ENEL regarding the interpretation of clauses governing infrastructure sharing compensation and the determination of the competent entity to resolve the dispute, either through arbitration or through the regulatory body OSIPTEL. The study examines OSIPTEL's resolutions, the obligations imposed on ENEL, and the regulator's powers to ensure compliance with regulations, including the imposition of sanctions and coercive fines. Furthermore, the report analyzes the implications of actions or omissions affecting the telecommunications services market and OSIPTEL's role in resolving such conflicts. Thus, throughout the investigation, three legal issues have been identified. First, it will be analyzed whether the compensation present in the Sharing Agreement is subject to arbitration. Second, it will be determined whether OSIPTEL has the authority to require ENEL to refund the excess amount paid. Finally, the regulator’s sanctioning capacity to enforce its obligations will be analyzed.
The present legal report focuses on the analysis of Resolution No. 00026-2020- TSC/OSIPTEL issued by the Tribunal for the Resolution of Disputes in relation to the dispute between Azteca Comunicaciones Perú S.A.C. and Enel Distribution Perú S.A.A. concerning access to and shared use of electrical infrastructure. The main dispute revolves around Azteca's claim against ENEL regarding the interpretation of clauses governing infrastructure sharing compensation and the determination of the competent entity to resolve the dispute, either through arbitration or through the regulatory body OSIPTEL. The study examines OSIPTEL's resolutions, the obligations imposed on ENEL, and the regulator's powers to ensure compliance with regulations, including the imposition of sanctions and coercive fines. Furthermore, the report analyzes the implications of actions or omissions affecting the telecommunications services market and OSIPTEL's role in resolving such conflicts. Thus, throughout the investigation, three legal issues have been identified. First, it will be analyzed whether the compensation present in the Sharing Agreement is subject to arbitration. Second, it will be determined whether OSIPTEL has the authority to require ENEL to refund the excess amount paid. Finally, the regulator’s sanctioning capacity to enforce its obligations will be analyzed.
Link to repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28401
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Derecho.
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Zúñiga Fernández, Tania; Moscol Salinas, Alejandro Martín; Tassano Velaochaga, Hebert Eduardo
Register date: 1-Aug-2024
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License