Bibliographic citations
Vargas, E., Emma, M. (2024). Criterios que limitan la razonabilidad de plazo en una inspección laboral [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/674861
Vargas, E., Emma, M. Criterios que limitan la razonabilidad de plazo en una inspección laboral [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/674861
@misc{renati/1298569,
title = "Criterios que limitan la razonabilidad de plazo en una inspección laboral",
author = "Emma Vargas, Maria Fernanda",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2024"
}
This investigation aimed to analyze the administrative precedent in Plenary Resolution No. 014-2022-SUNAFIL/TFL, which addressed the inspection order requirement No. 0948-2020-SUNAFIL/ issued by the National Superintendence of Labor Inspection (SUNAFIL) to TECNICAS REUNIDAS DE TALARA S.A.C. The first chapter elaborated on the most relevant facts and grounds of the resolution, along with binding precedents, to determine whether the reasonableness of the deadline granted for compliance with the inspection measure was adequate and whether the review recourse established in this case should have been declared well-founded. Furthermore, the second chapter detailed the most important legal concepts for the analysis of the case under study, such as administrative precedent and the principles of reasonableness, legality, and proportionality contained in the General Administrative Procedure Law - Law No. 27444. Additionally, it outlined the criteria of labor inspection, compliance with inspection duties, timely accreditation, and infringing conduct as stipulated in the Safety and Health Law - Law No. 29783. Finally, the third chapter examined the relationship between the granted deadline and its reasonableness to support the scope of the inspection measure, determining whether the rights of the company were safeguarded and protected, and how it could be related to jurisprudence and doctrine. It was concluded that the review recourse is unfounded because the criteria used by SUNAFIL to evaluate the reasonableness of the deadline granted were appropriate.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License