Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Marín, F., (2023). Informe Jurídico sobre la RESOLUCIÓNN° 086-2021-SUNARP-TR [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25519
Marín, F., Informe Jurídico sobre la RESOLUCIÓNN° 086-2021-SUNARP-TR []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2023. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25519
@misc{renati/28638,
title = "Informe Jurídico sobre la RESOLUCIÓNN° 086-2021-SUNARP-TR",
author = "Marín Rodríguez, Fenner Benjamín",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2023"
}
Title: Informe Jurídico sobre la RESOLUCIÓNN° 086-2021-SUNARP-TR
Authors(s): Marín Rodríguez, Fenner Benjamín
Advisor(s): Arata Solís, Rómulo Moisés
Keywords: Derecho de familia--Perú; Concubinato--Perú; Matrimonio--Régimen patrimonial; Derecho registral--Perú
OCDE field: https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01
Issue Date: 1-Aug-2023
Institution: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract: El autor del presente Informe Jurídico analiza los argumentos más importantes expuestos en la
Resolución N° 086-2021-SUNARP-TR para sustentar la admisión al Registro Personal de la
sustitución de régimen patrimonial de sociedad de gananciales, por el de separación de patrimonios,
en una unión de hecho declarada notarial o judicialmente. El autor busca determinar si
efectivamente los argumentos esbozados por el Tribunal Registral son suficientes; o si, por el
contrario, el Tribunal excede sus funciones de Órgano Administrativo de Segunda Instancia, al
permitir que acceda al registro un acto que no se encuentra previamente reconocido como
inscribible para los convivientes. Previo al análisis de fondo, el autor presenta un breve repaso
histórico de la regulación legal de la unión de hecho en el Perú, desde su primera mención, hasta su
actual regulación normativa en la Constitución y el Código Civil, así como algunos ejemplos de cómo
países cercanos a esa realidad jurídica y social, han establecido su regulación para la mencionada
institución. En relación al caso, el autor identifica y expone los hechos más relevantes, así como los
argumentos que utiliza el registrador para sustentar la tacha sustantiva en primera instancia; para
posteriormente comenzar con la presentación y el análisis de cada uno de los argumentos de la
resolución. El autor finalmente concluye que, si debe proceder el cambio de régimen patrimonial de
la unión de hecho, más no por las razones expuestas por el Tribunal Registral.
The author of this legal report analyzes the most important arguments presented in resolution No. 086-2021-SUNARP-TR to support the admission to the personal registry of the replacement of the property regime of community property, by the separation of assets, in a de facto union declared by a notary or judicially. The author seeks to determine if indeed the arguments outlined by the Registry Court are sufficient; or if, on the contrary, the court exceeds its functions as Second Instance Administrative Body, by allowing an act that is not previously recognized as registrable for the cohabitants to access the registry. Prior to the in-depth analysis, the author presents a brief historical review of the legal regulation of the de facto union in Peru, from its first mention, to its current normative regulation in the Constitution and the Civil Code, as well as some examples of how Countries close to this legal and social reality have established their regulations for the aforementioned institution. In relation to the case, the author identifies and exposes the most relevant facts, as well as the arguments used by the registrar to support the substantive fault in the first instance; to later begin with the presentation and analysis of each of the arguments of the resolution. The author finally concludes that the change in the property regime of the de facto union should proceed, but not for the reasons stated by the Registry Court.
The author of this legal report analyzes the most important arguments presented in resolution No. 086-2021-SUNARP-TR to support the admission to the personal registry of the replacement of the property regime of community property, by the separation of assets, in a de facto union declared by a notary or judicially. The author seeks to determine if indeed the arguments outlined by the Registry Court are sufficient; or if, on the contrary, the court exceeds its functions as Second Instance Administrative Body, by allowing an act that is not previously recognized as registrable for the cohabitants to access the registry. Prior to the in-depth analysis, the author presents a brief historical review of the legal regulation of the de facto union in Peru, from its first mention, to its current normative regulation in the Constitution and the Civil Code, as well as some examples of how Countries close to this legal and social reality have established their regulations for the aforementioned institution. In relation to the case, the author identifies and exposes the most relevant facts, as well as the arguments used by the registrar to support the substantive fault in the first instance; to later begin with the presentation and analysis of each of the arguments of the resolution. The author finally concludes that the change in the property regime of the de facto union should proceed, but not for the reasons stated by the Registry Court.
Link to repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25519
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Derecho.
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Espinoza Espinoza, Juan Alejandro; Arata Solís, Rómulo Moisés; Ortiz Pasco, Jorge Antonio Martín
Register date: 1-Aug-2023
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License